0 users browsing Discussion. | 6 guests | 11 bots
| tomman |
Posted on 19-03-26, 12:31
|
|
Dinosaur
 Post: #226 of 1318 Since: 10-30-18 Last post: 3 days Last view: 3 hours |
The only installer I've used was of the OSR2-sans-IE4 variety, can't vouch for any others. As for Windows 98... I don't remember having performed any installs of that one, like, EVER. It was WinMe (as a routine because my Deceleron loved to seriously cream its pants at least twice a year) or Win95 (either in VMs or in my 386SX). I do remember that for WinMe, MS had already switched to the 25-character keys we've been using since. Licensed Pirate® since 2006, 100% Buttcoin™-free, enemy of All Things JavaScript™ |
| Duck Penis |
Posted on 19-03-26, 15:43 (revision 1)
|
|
Stirrer of Shit
Post: #130 of 717 Since: 01-26-19 Last post: 1770 days Last view: 1768 days |
Posted by wertigon Sci-hub is a far higher priority to Elsevier than ROM hacking is to Nintendo. No teenager ever got sued for $4,800,000 million or burned through 10-20 domains. I'd imagine they're throwing whatever resources they can at it. I mean, if you read here, even ordinarily piracy-happy torrentfreak seems to imply that Sci-Hub causes Elsevier huge losses: Would the universities cancel their subscriptions so easily if their researchers couldn’t use Sci-Hub to get free copies? It's not like it's some obscure project nobody has ever heard of. It's ranked 679 on Alexa, with the backup domain at 5636. For comparison, ubuntu.com is at 1880 and thepiratebay.org at 228. What's with the 2% figure? Why wouldn't it survive at 8% or 80%? Your point about backdoors in the ISO is also a theoretical possibility, but it'd be trivial to audit. I would argue the risk is lower than if you were to go to The Pirate Bay and download the first hit for 'Windows {7|8.1|10} ISO'. There was a certain photograph about which you had a hallucination. You believed that you had actually held it in your hands. It was a photograph something like this. |
| Screwtape |
Posted on 19-03-26, 22:50
|
|
Full mod
 Post: #183 of 443 Since: 10-30-18 Last post: 1108 days Last view: 179 days |
My guess: Elsevier is bad at this. The software, music, and movie industries have been dealing with copyright infringement and international law for a long time, they've got the contacts, people have heard of Windows and Shrek and Metallica, higher-up like the State Department or Department of Foreign Affairs see the importance of working on cases like that, and elected officials see the prestige. I get the impression that Elsevier has only had to deal with universities before, and not cared too much about copyright infringement as long as universities kept paying their subscription fees. Now suddenly they care a lot, but they're having a much harder time persuading the people in charge to make international incidents about it. Some quick investigation reveals that "ameliorated.info" is registered by Tucows (a Canadian company) and hosted by Hosting Solution Ltd. (a American company), so not quite as difficult to take offline as Sci-Hub. The ending of the words is ALMSIVI. |
| Duck Penis |
Posted on 19-03-27, 00:36
|
|
Stirrer of Shit
Post: #136 of 717 Since: 01-26-19 Last post: 1770 days Last view: 1768 days |
Posted by Screwtape Yup. And Ameliorated is solidly within the realm of "happy amateurs". No security to write home about, but seem to be competent and passionate people. Hopefully they'll start sweating when the C&Ds come in and turn their panic into something productive. I don't see where you get Hosting Solution Ltd. from though. Whois of the IP that the domain points to gives me King-Servers, a Russian hosting company whose owner has been implicated in shady business in the past. That said, taking down a server or domain changes nothing, as long as the project lives on. The only thing that matters is if you're able to bring in the people running it. If they can't, then nothing can be done, and if they can, all the decentralization in the world can't alleviate the issue that nobody is developing it. The Pirate Bay has since the trial been run continually by an anonymous group of people observing security best practices, and it hasn't had any major interruptions except for that one time in 2014. You could argue it's not being targeted, but it clearly was targeted enough to get their domains seized. I can't think of any website that was continually off-line when the owners were determined to continue running it and had the necessary basic skills to keep doing so. The closest I can get would be botnet C&C, but they strictly speaking aren't websites and lack the ability to switch domains. I'm no expert on geopolitics, but I don't think the Kazakh government would launch a manhunt on the behalf of American companies. Sci-hub have already been sued, Elsevier would have to go a step further in actually pressuring the local police into hunting down everyone involved with running it. Maybe I underestimate their reach, but I strongly doubt that even a large media company could pull this off. Certainly, we are heading in the direction where controversial websites will be unable to exist on the clearnet, but we are far off from reaching it. More likely is that the change comes from the other direction, with the phishing blocklist. Before you deem this an insane proposition, consider that it already today in both major browsers is impossible to sideload an add-on that hasn't been signed, and that to obtain this signature in Chrome requires you upload it to the Chrome Web Store, which requires you to follow the Developer Program Policies. So far, Mozilla allows you to get add-ons signed without distributing them through AMO, and in such cases relaxes their policy to "no malware". This could change at any given time, and it's impossible to sideload an addon that hasn't been signed. What prevents Google from blocking all websites that don't follow their terms of service? (Of course, the answer is turtles all the way down - they won't need to, since blocking them from their search engine is plenty enough) Now, Mozilla is not actually doing this yet. But why wouldn't they? As long as they remain the least bad of the two options, they can do whatever they feel like. And increasing "security" as far as they can go is obviously in their best interests financially, since it would decrease their user base if Google were the only ones to do so and Firefox were to develop a reputation as a "dangerous" browser. There was a certain photograph about which you had a hallucination. You believed that you had actually held it in your hands. It was a photograph something like this. |
| Duck Penis |
Posted on 19-03-27, 22:10
|
|
Stirrer of Shit
Post: #139 of 717 Since: 01-26-19 Last post: 1770 days Last view: 1768 days |
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA-Posted by https://www.computerworld.com/article/3293429/with-daas-windows-coming-say-goodbye-to-your-pc-as-you-know-it.html -AAAAAAAAAAAAAAARGH. You think this won't affect you? Try writing that from your laptop with 32GB non-removable SSD and Windows-only Secure Boot (think "Find my iPhone"). Or maybe you'd like to take a stab at writing it from your desktop computer you built yourself with parts you bought from someone whose main clients are the shrinking pool of PC gamers? Oh well, it's fine. Just keep using old computers and pray the new, proprietary, drivers aren't subarch compiled for whatever comes after AVX-512. And that Mozilla doesn't pull anything stupid. The CIA wants all code in the cloud under their lock and key. They want to ban compilers and make people think HTML is computer programming. They want to evaporate desktops so you have no local computer, just massive cloud computers. Terry Davis was right. There was a certain photograph about which you had a hallucination. You believed that you had actually held it in your hands. It was a photograph something like this. |
| CaptainJistuce |
Posted on 19-03-27, 22:23
|
|
Custom title here
 Post: #369 of 1164 Since: 10-30-18 Last post: 70 days Last view: 8 hours |
Man, the CIA mostly just wants admin access to facebook. --- In UTF-16, where available. --- |
| tomman |
Posted on 19-03-27, 23:01
|
|
Dinosaur
Post: #231 of 1318 Since: 10-30-18 Last post: 3 days Last view: 3 hours |
If your "cloudy clouds of cloud computer" AKA "DaaS" become a reality, us living at 3rd-world shitholes with barely any access to tech can kiss computers goodbye. Remember, "DaaS" is made for "not me". So much for "emerging economies", yo. Good luck getting anyone in India embrace this shit. Licensed Pirate® since 2006, 100% Buttcoin™-free, enemy of All Things JavaScript™ |
| Duck Penis |
Posted on 19-03-27, 23:25 (revision 1)
|
|
Stirrer of Shit
Post: #142 of 717 Since: 01-26-19 Last post: 1770 days Last view: 1768 days |
What do you need computers for when you have smartphones? They even secured them for you so you can't get any viruses, and hate speech is soon to be a thing of the past. What isn't there to like? Venezuela might not be able to have any computers, but at least they can pride themselves on becoming a cashless society, narrowly beating out Sweden and the United Kingdom for first place. There was a certain photograph about which you had a hallucination. You believed that you had actually held it in your hands. It was a photograph something like this. |
| Kawaoneechan |
Posted on 19-03-27, 23:45
|
|
Brony
 Post: #183 of 599 Since: 10-29-18 Last post: 202 days Last view: 4 hours |
Posted by sureanemWe have jest and sarcasm tags. Please, use them when you say stuff like that. |
| Duck Penis |
Posted on 19-03-27, 23:53
|
|
Stirrer of Shit
Post: #143 of 717 Since: 01-26-19 Last post: 1770 days Last view: 1768 days |
Shit, I thought it was apparent. Poe's law. There was a certain photograph about which you had a hallucination. You believed that you had actually held it in your hands. It was a photograph something like this. |
| CaptainJistuce |
Posted on 19-03-28, 01:30
|
|
Custom title here
Post: #372 of 1164 Since: 10-30-18 Last post: 70 days Last view: 8 hours |
Posted by sureanemWhat does Star Wars have to do with this? --- In UTF-16, where available. --- |
| Screwtape |
Posted on 19-03-28, 01:53 (revision 1)
|
|
Full mod
Post: #186 of 443 Since: 10-30-18 Last post: 1108 days Last view: 179 days |
Pretty sure he means the little ghosts in Zelda games. The ending of the words is ALMSIVI. |
| CaptainJistuce |
Posted on 19-03-28, 01:56
|
|
Custom title here
Post: #373 of 1164 Since: 10-30-18 Last post: 70 days Last view: 8 hours |
Quoth the raven "Zelda 4". --- In UTF-16, where available. --- |
| Wowfunhappy |
Posted on 19-04-14, 17:05
|
|
Post: #4 of 21
Since: 11-08-18 Last post: 1261 days Last view: 1261 days |
Could Windows AME be legally distributed as a BPS or some other kind of diff patch?Posted by wertigon Ironically, I find that this is the use case that makes Microsoft's forced updates most annoying. I only booted Windows when I wanted to do something specific (primarily, play a video game), and every time I did Windows need to install an update immediately because it hadn't been online in so long. (Past tense, because auto updates are now disabled in group policy. Thank god.) |
| Duck Penis |
Posted on 19-04-14, 19:32
|
|
Stirrer of Shit
Post: #206 of 717 Since: 01-26-19 Last post: 1770 days Last view: 1768 days |
Posted by Wowfunhappy Yeah, sure. They have instructions on the website, so they could just make it an automatic script. Most of it consists of deleting files, so it would be a very small diff patch to apply. But it's easier to ship a modified image. They don't seem to be overly worried about copyright. I sincerely hope they start worrying and taking precautions soon, for their own good. Although I suppose a court case is good PR too, so it doesn't really matter. There was a certain photograph about which you had a hallucination. You believed that you had actually held it in your hands. It was a photograph something like this. |
| Duck Penis |
Posted on 19-04-27, 00:49
|
|
Stirrer of Shit
Post: #219 of 717 Since: 01-26-19 Last post: 1770 days Last view: 1768 days |
Amazon is fighting South America over the “.amazon” domain gTLDs were a mistake. Why does anyone need to "govern" a TLD anyway? For ccTLDs I understand it, and it's perfectly reasonable. But for .com, .org, or .biz, there's no requirement to be a company, organization, or business respectively. .mil and .int are special cases, I suppose. What value does this add to society? Amazon gets to have a cool domain hack, and parsing URLs becomes extremely difficult? You used to be able to type google.com and it'd get linked. Now, how are you supposed to know without also flagging a false.positive from people fat-fingering their smartphones? You could try to match it to a gTLD, but it's only a matter of time before someone registers .positive. (Also, I love that there's a Wikipedia article named 2018 Samsung fat-finger error) I mean, I can see the appeal of .tokyo. But couldn't they just set up .tokyo.jp without having to involve the ICANN? You can see the full list with usage stats here - 338 have only one domain registered. Can you find a single useful one? My suggestion is that .bananarepublic be expropriated for use as a government domain, in exchange for Amazon Inc. getting .amazon. There was a certain photograph about which you had a hallucination. You believed that you had actually held it in your hands. It was a photograph something like this. |
| creaothceann |
Posted on 19-04-27, 01:16
|
 Post: #128 of 456 Since: 10-29-18 Last post: 51 days Last view: 3 hours |
Posted by sureanem Fun fact: also happens to computers My current setup: Super Famicom ("2/1/3" SNS-CPU-1CHIP-02) → SCART → OSSC → StarTech USB3HDCAP → AmaRecTV 3.10 |
| Duck Penis |
Posted on 19-04-27, 14:07
|
|
Stirrer of Shit
Post: #221 of 717 Since: 01-26-19 Last post: 1770 days Last view: 1768 days |
Posted by creaothceann Oh wow, that's a whole new level of aggravating edge case. "computer fucked something up somewhere lol, also it's probably invisible" I wonder if you could do that for emails. Register some big corporate domains, then just log whatever it receives and sell it on the black market. And because it's a bit flip, no logs anywhere. You should even be able to get an SSL certificate for it. And I can't see why it would be illegal, even though it's somewhat morally dubious. It's also an interesting DoS vector, like that one time when the Chinese did the same to GitHub. He's not right in that "big names now buy up all their bit flipped domains" - of the top 100 domains (according to cisco, so by dns resolutions; 37 second-level domains) there are 528 unregistered bit-flipped ones. Even more if you would start to play around with the TLDs as well. For "small" names (think stuff like internal corporate domains, which are usually really long), I don't even think it's a feasible idea. Are they going to pay $1k/domain/year to fix a "theoretical" vulnerability? No pointy-haired manager in their right mind would allow that. Well, I suppose that's an application for gTLDs. Until someone registers .cmazon, that is. Then There was a certain photograph about which you had a hallucination. You believed that you had actually held it in your hands. It was a photograph something like this. |
| Duck Penis |
Posted on 19-07-07, 18:34
|
|
Stirrer of Shit
Post: #471 of 717 Since: 01-26-19 Last post: 1770 days Last view: 1768 days |
The death watch for the X Window System (aka X11) has probably started Probably the first time I am excited about the death of legacy technology. With that and AppImages, my two biggest gripes with Linux will be gone. With Mozilla's coming Tor support, I can actually feel kind of optimistic about the future of technology if I don't look too hard.  There was a certain photograph about which you had a hallucination. You believed that you had actually held it in your hands. It was a photograph something like this. |
| tomman |
Posted on 19-07-07, 21:43
|
|
Dinosaur
Post: #425 of 1318 Since: 10-30-18 Last post: 3 days Last view: 3 hours |
Will I still able to browse websites, watch porn, play my Steam videogames, and rant about shit that bugs me once X is dead? If yes, then go ahead, Wayland in the future all the way, as I don't care for as long as you don't let the UXtards to get in the middle. But I can hear the extremist UNIXoid fanatic nerds screaming in horror as yet ANOTHER of their beloved legacy traditions get into the chopping block. Also, letting the GNOME guys in charge of ANYTHING involving public-facing software is NEVER good, no matter if the reasoning is solid (they will find a way to ruin it anyway). Licensed Pirate® since 2006, 100% Buttcoin™-free, enemy of All Things JavaScript™ |
[Your ad here? Why not!]