Stop Microsoft
All Things Microsoft => Microsoft as a Company => Topic started by: TuxLinux on 17 August 2005, 10:15
-
Some opinions and facts:
According to Bloomberg a virus has shutdown parts of SBC, Cnn, ABC and Time Warner. CNN as you know, does not allow to listen to the streams outside of wmp10. Abc too and most of Time Warner. But that is unrelated this targets a flaw in windows outside of WMP10 itself. Just wanted to mention how happy I am this happened. (In a sense that they do not allow anything else). They are too reliant on Microsoft and paid a price. "Time loss / man hours" They may reconsider "keeping closed". With what users could listen to streams with.
wet Appetite:
Microsoft Virus Attacks SBC Communications, CNN, ABC Computers
Aug. 17 (Bloomberg) -- A computer virus targeting Microsoft Corp.'s Windows software shut down machines at Time Warner Inc.'s Cable News Network and SBC Communications Inc., and may spread globally, according to antivirus software companies.
Full story:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000103&sid=aShw_J9dN7h0&refer=us
-
That will show CNN to use their own product, Netscape, instead of Internet Explorer (which is of a rival company).
-
Just last night at 11 CNN was having a story about this new virus.
My dad was like 'come see this thing'
I said, oh nothing to worry about; we're not using Microsoft.
-
Just wanted to mention how happy I am this happened.
What reason is there to be actually *happy* about this?
I was under the impression that CNN used Macs, anyway. Whenever they do the blog reports, they show Safari.
-
I always see them using IE
-
Everybody uses Macs for editing and graphics (except the ones who use Linux). Good bet the CNN graphics and video departments are sitting around laughing at the rest of the idiots in the company.
-
The funny thing about this is a patch has been around longer than the Virus. It is lazy admins, not a lazy Microsoft.
-
One of the new killer worms, W32/IRCbot, was first seen live only 7 days after the relevant vulnerability announcement. Those damn crackers are getting good at this. With so much practice...
-
Just last night at 11 CNN was having a story about this new virus.
My dad was like 'come see this thing'
I said, oh nothing to worry about; we're not using Microsoft.
Hahaha, that made me laugh. :p:D
Windows Error Message : Program has crashed, please reboot.
I'LL GIVE YOU CRASHED DAMNED WINDOWS!!! *smashes keyboard into PSU fan :D
-
It isn't really difficult to write a Virus once you have an exploit. There is plenty of examples and source code around. I have read a whole book on the subject, but then I do hardly any programming anymore so it would take me a bit to get back on the ball. But it really isn't that hard to do. Neither is writing an exploit once you find it.
-
Could teach me how? ;)
Just kidding. :p
-
go to your local technical bookstore and shop around, learn C, C++, or whatever.
nobody can just show you, you just have to read lots
-
Yeah, I know a few commands in C++, but not much at all, we have a C++ book here, it's massive, might give that a read when I'm bored. ;)
-
LEET.
Oh and what really helps is knowing about some real forums (http://voidmain.is-a-geek.net/forums/).
-
Wicked, thanks a lot for that link Kintaro, those look like some great forums. ;)
-
Void Main used to post here, until someone (not to mention names) offended him enough to leave forever and make his own forum with facist policy on it to prevent it happening again. It practically killed FuckMicrosoft when that happened.
-
Jesus, that's bad....
Well, I love those forums anyway, they are cool! :)
Cheers for the info. ;)
-
Void Main's forums are a privilege, not a right - please don't ruin it for the rest of us. Keep it strictly technical there, please.
-
WTF happened to my account on voidmain's forums?
You have specified an incorrect or inactive username, or an invalid password.
-
From what I read in the paper today, there are actually at least three competing groups of hackers using worm variants playing Capture the Flag with unpatched Win 2000 computers worldwide.
Successive worms were written to remove previous competing versions, so either this is a game or the spammers need to protect their bot network to keep that viagra email flowing.
-
Void Mains forums seem to be dedicated to developing/fixing Linux
These forums are for abusing MS. So you can't really say it competes.
"worm variants playing Capture the Flag"
Sound like fun :) but I don't do that sort of thing.
-
Yeah, there has also been a lot of speculation in the past to who exactly Void Main is. Personally all this speculation is rubbish. Void Main is the 21st century incarnation of Jesus Christ. THE LINUX JESUS.
-
Linux Christ...
Christ is the English representation of the Greek word Χριστός (transliterated as Khrist
-
Yeah and the Linux Jews(Microsoft) Who killed JESUS,
Lets hope they will not do it again you know.
-
Bap.
-
I'm surprised you can use a computer in Bulgaria :D
-
Bulwhereia?
-
Hey don't make my find my files about John Atanasov
you know the guy WHO INVENTED COMPUTERS!!!!!
AND FIRST THOUGHT ABOUT USEING BINARY!!
he is also bulgarian
-
Charles Babbage was the first to conceptualise and design a fully programmable computer as early as 1837
the use of digital electronics (essentially invented by Claude Shannon in 1937)
Defining one point along this road as "the first computer" is exceedingly difficult. Notable achievements include Konrad Zuse's Z machines; the electro-mechanical Z3 was arguably the first universal computer, but it was completely impractical to use in this manner;
the secret British Colossus computer, which had limited programmability but demonstrated that a device using thousands of valves could be made reliable; and the American ENIAC - a general purpose machine, but with an inflexible architecture that meant reprogramming it essentially required it to be rewired.
The team who developed ENIAC, recognizing its flaws, came up with a far more flexible and elegant design which has become known as the stored program architecture, which is the basis from which virtually all modern computers were derived. A number of projects to develop computers based on this architecture commenced in the late 1940's; the first of these to be up and running was the Manchester Small-Scale Experimental Machine, but the EDSAC was perhaps the first practical version.
---
One of the earliest representations of a binary system was made by Pythagoreans in the 6th century BC. Their system described in fragments of Philolaus show us that binary numeral system was the core of their philosophical teachings. Limit and Unlimited are the two uncreated opposites of Philolaus.
Although the British philosophers Francis Bacon had earlier described a developed system of concealed binary encoding for encryption, the modern binary number system was first fully documented by Gottfried Leibniz in the 17th century in his article Explication de l'Arithm
-
Atanas Atanasov was a 38-year old Bulgarian crew member of the French oil tanker Limburg. Atanasov was working on the Limburg when it was rammed by an explosives-laden boat on October 6, 2002. After the blast, Atanasov was either thrown or jumped into the sea off Yemen, where he died. His body was found a day later.
Mr. Atanasov became the first Bulgarian victim of international terrorism in modern times.
Prime minister
Georgi Atanasov
-
Nope here is the truth:
The ABC computer was before eniac there was even court decision that
the abc computer was first and the mother of all modern Personal Computers
Inventors of the Modern Computer
The Atanasoff-Berry Computer the First Electronic Computer - John Atanasoff and Clifford Berry
Professor John Atanasoff and graduate student Clifford Berry built the world's first electronic-digital computer at Iowa State University between 1939 and 1942. The Atanasoff-Berry Computer represented several innovations in computing, including a binary system of arithmetic, parallel processing, regenerative memory, and a separation of memory and computing functions
http://inventors.about.com/library/weekly/aa050898.htm (http://inventors.about.com/library/weekly/aa050898.htm)
John Vincent Atanasoff:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Atanasoff (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Atanasoff)
-
Bulgarian Pridde Yo.
-
Slightly outdated...but whatever...
About John Atanasov.
John Atanasov (who was a bulgarian in origin, living in USA). He, along with Clifford Berry invented the first electric computer, where "electric" i mean it was assembled from electronical parts, instead of mechanical. Thus the first "real" computer in the world was invented.
Their computer wasn't like the the ones we have in our homes, in the terms of power, performance and flexibility.
But the arhitecture of their computer was absolutely the same - John Von Neumann's, which stated that instructions had to be fed in on an a static source (like the modern memory storages, instead of paper tape, or by rearranging hundreds of removable plug wires into a special pattern on a panel, like an old telephone switchboard). Von Neumann also recommended replacing the decimal number system with binary inside the computer, which is particularly suited to the computer as it can be represented easily using electrical charge.
I suppose every computers-interrested person should know these facts...:thumbup:
-
Slightly outdated...but whatever...
About John Atanasov.
John Atanasov (who was a bulgarian in origin, living in USA). He, along with Clifford Berry invented the first electric computer, where "electric" i mean it was assembled from electronical parts, instead of mechanical. Thus the first "real" computer in the world was invented.
Their computer wasn't like the the ones we have in our homes, in the terms of power, performance and flexibility.
But the arhitecture of their computer was absolutely the same - John Von Neumann's, which stated that instructions had to be fed in on an a static source (like the modern memory storages, instead of paper tape, or by rearranging hundreds of removable plug wires into a special pattern on a panel, like an old telephone switchboard). Von Neumann also recommended replacing the decimal number system with binary inside the computer, which is particularly suited to the computer as it can be represented easily using electrical charge.
I suppose every computers-interrested person should know these facts...:thumbup:
Welcome to the forums:):thumbup:
-
history is written by the winners/those in power...who really knows?
Tesla v Marconi for instance...
Some day, all of this might even matter, but for today, MS made virus propegation possible.
-
ergo, Windows is a disease?
(sure seems like it to me...)
-
history is written by the winners/those in power...who really knows?
Of course those in power write history in their favor, if they had the power (and scribes and libraries to do it) why not ? who was there to force them to write down history without bias ? I know that history is heavily biased from the many many different takes on the same event in different history books. This is most noticible to me (but not limited to) in World history as told by the USA ... what a bunch of BS ... that's why I very much distrust history books. Unless they come up with some real evidence (as opposed to falsified evidence) they can't fully convince me that anything they say happened really did happen. Now, I'm not saying I don't believe in history, I'm just saying that I distrust it very much. Usually in any given argument I'll momentarily assume that the history told to me is (for all intensive purposes) true ... but there is always in the back of my mind the fact that the rich and powerful wrote history in their favor, and that history has also been twisted through the ages by those translators and editors and new all powerful leaders wanting to improve their image.
PS. I just remembered there was an article on how the government was re-classifying historical documents ... removing them from public access until they are further revised ... it was in another post somewhere in here, lemme see if I can find it.
-
I trust The History Channel
-
[offtopic]History is what it is. It will always be written by the ones who make the decisions and victories...and the ones who control the documentation.
Yes, American History is different than others. IE...American revolution v The Colonial revolt of 1776. History is a matter of perception as well. It all depends where your standing when something happens. What you think you saw, someone an equal distance away, looking from an opposing ngle will generally have a similar but very different story...nothing new....[/offtopic]
How about them windows as a virus target???
-
[offtopic]History is what it is. It will always be written by the ones who make the decisions and victories...and the ones who control the documentation.
Yes, American History is different than others. IE...American revolution v The Colonial revolt of 1776. History is a matter of perception as well. It all depends where your standing when something happens. What you think you saw, someone an equal distance away, looking from an opposing ngle will generally have a similar but very different story...nothing new....[/offtopic]
[OFFTOPIC]Of course that's true. But the problem is that many people define parts of their existence based on what they consider to be historical truths. Millions of Americans believe right now that Iraq had done something to deserve invasion, that the US was forced to drop the atomic bomb in order to save the lives of American troops, and that American troops were sent to Vietnam to protect the South Vietnamese non-communists (sources available, just ask). Believing such garbage doesn't harm anyone in and of itself. However, these beliefs affect how people make decisions about other things that do harm others. Opening people's eyes to the truth of just one event can have a cascading ripple effect that affects all of society. So we should probably take the importance of multi-faceted history lessons pretty seriously.[/OFFTOPIC]
-
that the US was forced to drop the atomic bomb in order to save the lives of American troops,
This one is half true. It wasn't forced but it chose to. And in truth not just American lives. But I suppose 10x the dead through conventional weapons is still better than what was caused by the two atomic bombs combined. So yeah, it was the wrong choice.
-
Actually, according to a book I read, Japan was already prepared to surrender, and it was trying to get the Soviet Union to arbiter a surrender agreement, since Japan felt (rightly so) that the US would not give them a fair deal (think 10+ years of military occupation). But we had to test the bomb somewhere.
-
Don't take it personal, but your events are almost ludicrous. Japan was not friendly with the Soviets, to say the least. Overall they were terrified of Russian occupation (i.e. enslavement) much more than a US occupation. Historical arguments that I've heard float around, and which I tend to believe, even claim that that fear of Russia also contributed to the surrender. And a tough surrender it was. 2 towns destroyed and probably fear from Soviet enslavement. And yet many Japanese STILL did not want to surrender. But it was up to the emperor at the end.
Saying that it was wrong because Japan was about to surrender is like saying it's wrong for me to shoot a known killer pointing a gun at me because in his mind he was about to surrender.
Regardless of historical conjecture, the undeniable reality is that Japan had NOT surrendered and showed no intention of doing so to the enemy, and just after the last main battle around Okinawa which took more lives than the 2 bombs combined and was just one of many many bloody battles in the pacific war. In fact the intention would have seemed the opposite to anyone on the business end of things like their kamikaze strikes.
-
I'm thinking I have to agree with GA...
The Japanese vets I had priviledge to talk with while I was in Korea said they would have never surrendured. They believed Americans were coming to enslave them, treat them miserabley, rape thier women and kill their babies. It wsn't until after the bombs forced a surrendur that they discovered that wasn't the case. It was a great propeganda machine though. It ensured the Japanese would fight hard, long and mostly to the death in the pacific...Not to mention by thier own traditions, defeat was punishable by death anyways.
We won, we got to write the book :P
-
Interesting. Fear of Soviet enslavement never comes up in this book. However, it does say that the Japanese military was operating outside of the control of the people and government of Japan. It's possible that the Japanese people could have surrendered, leaving their already rogue military to fend for itself, which certainly would have been disastrous for everyone.
Unfortunately, it's also possible that everything all of us has heard was a big lie. I certainly wouldn't trust Japanese soldiers to know the truth, anymore than I would trust American soldiers to know the truth. Their job is to fight, and they are necessarily kept ignorant of overall strategies.
And then again, I've only read one book on the subject. While it does appear to be completely scholarly, it could be wrong too. The only thing that can be known for sure is that none of the stories we have heard paint a complete picture. Thus, it would not be intelligent to blindly believe any of them.
-
Why bother with history ... I mean there's no way you can prove that anything you say is right. Which way did it really happen ... both seem plausible ... but you'll never know for sure, so forget that shit. Unless history is accurate it is useless, and history is not accurate ... thus history is useless.
-
Why bother with history ... I mean there's no way you can prove that anything you say is right. Which way did it really happen ... both seem plausible ... but you'll never know for sure, so forget that shit. Unless history is accurate it is useless, and history is not accurate ... thus history is useless.
Agreed.
However, for a country that has nuclear weapons, it is pretty damn important to know when to use them and when not to use them. Since it has only happened once before, it would be kinda nice to know whether that was the right choice or not. Numerous members of the current administration have said publicly that they would never rule out the use of nuclear weapons in any military campaign. Which means that now more than ever it is important to have some sort of rubric that defines when it is okay to use the damn things. And some sort of history is a big part of that. So even if history is useless, we have a use for it.
-
Killing innocent people is bad. Killing guilty people is good.
So, drop an atomic bomb when it's the best solution to (a) killing the least amount of innocent people while (b) killing the most amount of guilty people.
Or that's close enough to what way I'd go about sorting it out.
Every man responsible for those two atomic bombs simply was not thinking about the innocent people.
When you get 100 million Nazis in a few consecutive counties, call me.
-
Use logic and reason instead ... those little things everyone has forgotten about or twisted into something far from what they should be. It's never ok to use nuclear weapons for many many many reasons ... radiaton, mass death and destruction, mutations, contamination of food and water sources, tons of money wasted cleaning up the shit. War is never ok either, but hey can you stop it ? Can you convince everyone to put down their weapons and stop the madness ? Do you care to ? I don't, they made their own bed, now they will sleep in it.
P.S. One of my theories (one of the wierder ones) on this is as follows:
All people on this planet are guilty of the acts anyone commits ... collective guilt. If your neighbor commits a crime you and everyone else on this planet is as guilty of it as the neighbor himself. Why ? Because you allow it to happen ... you don't stop it ... you don't prevent it ... you live with it
Also note that at times I seem to contradict myself ... well, you're right I do, because I don't always express my personal point of view in what I say ... just making an argument, seeing if it holds water, if it does, keep it ... if not, discard it
-
But like I said, conjecture of intent aside, no kind of historical record outside of a tinfoil hat club will deny that Japan was not surrendering. And with that said, if you think that an invasion by US forces into Japan would have not caused several times the deaths of civilians than the two bombs, I think you'd be wrong, because the regular people just did as they were told for the most part. And appearently that's what the people who decided to deploy them took into account also. And I seriously doubt it was purely a logical decision either. In war things often aren't.
And warm fuzzies never saved anyone from a determined onslaught. Yeah, it's your right to choose that philosophy as your only reaction to an attack. Maybe it's a humane way to accept your maiming or your destruction. But if you ask me, it's wrong to impose that philosophy on others.
-
I'm not imosing anything on anyone ... were you talking to me ? Far from it, I'm just thowing arguments out there ... I'm not being forceful am I ? ... You must listen to what I say, I am absolutely right, you have no right ot question me or what I say, you will obey ! :)
It's interesting, if you tell something to someone early and often enough you can get them to fight for it as if they came up with it themselves ... even though I think Aristotle is for the most part an idiot in the scientific field ... this was one of his most successful rhetorical theories (he was much better at rhetoric than at science). Get people to convince themselves that what you say is true and they will fight for it as if they came with the idea themselves.
-
I was also throwing arguments out there. Maybe one day I will believe that nothing is worth fighting for, but I'm not that much of a free thinker atm. Maybe I will be when I'm dead or a veggie.
-
OK, then I'll sum it up as simple as I see it.
A bomb that would kill 100,000 people and end a war...for sure.It's not goin to get the bulk of opposing forces, but it will guarantee and end to attrocities.
An air, land and sea war that will claim 100,000,000 lives and take a decade to resolve.
It seems obvious to me which abomination I would choose.
-
Let's divorce this discussion from WW2 for a moment and be purely hypothetical.
Your conclusion is the only logical resolution, given that your numbers are correct. But how reliable are those numbers? And what other considerations besides the pure numbers are you not considering? Remember that purely utilitarian arguments tend to be cold and viscious and unpopular.
-
Ok then, would you rather I kill your father...or your whole family? Maybe I worded that wrong...You are in a position wherre you can end major problems, there are only 2 decisions. 1 - Your Father has to die and all will be right with the world...Option 2, your whole family will die. To make no decision means option 2 auto happens. To stall makes option 2 happen, to attempt to come up with any other otion, causes option 2 to happen.
Is that divorced.
I hate to sound Star Treki about it...
In dicisions of this nature, you have to weigh the needs of many over the needs of the few. Or in this case, the losses of life. You can include the damage in money as well as loss of human life, either way the "quick method wins. As in the WWII analogy, 2 cities VS an entire set of islands and any sub islands.
BUT the long term, what about radiation and contamination and mutation and what ever other blahblations you can think of...It's hard when you pick the wrong side, tough it's a direct repercussion of a previous decision they made.
-
Your hypothetical scenario is just a little bit too "you must decide right fucking now" to be educational. By the time I finished pissing my pants, it would be too late. No choices made under that kind of pressure can be logical. They are either instinctual or irrational.
Fine, let's just not be hypothetical. I'm somewhat certain that the Japanese had no intention of fighting to the last man. I'm also extremely certain that the Japanese didn't have the economic resources to continue fighting to the last man (Japanese manufacturing was already stunted, and would have ground to a halt after a couple weeks of bombing raids from Okinawa - while the US was churning out 40 planes a day, and was ready to increase production). And they were negotiating surrender, I'll post quotes and sources later this week. If these 3 points are true, then the 10,000 < 100,000,000 doesn't hold water. You see what I'm saying?
(of course I'm no historian, and neither are you)
(dammit, I wish heatedbates was open, I hate doing this here)
-
I agree, we should hold this for when Kev decides which way to go with it...