jcl
-
Content Count
1299 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Calendar
Posts posted by jcl
-
-
First, let us look at the time period that Wikipedia claims Islam had its "Golden Age". At about the same time Islam was rapidly expanding. It engulfed the Middle East and North Africa. Everywhere Islam went, so did its harsh rulers and treatment of infidels.
That's not unusual. The Roman 'Golden Age' coincided with (or slightly preceded, depending on your POV) the Roman conquest of Europe and the Renaissance and Enlightenment coincided with the European conquest of the Americas and Africa. There was, as I recall, even a 'mini-renaissance' that coincided with the Crusades.
Many of accomplishments given to Islam really go to the Byzitean, Persians, and the others that they took over.No doubt.
Furthermore, many of the arts that came from Muslims are significant not because of the Islamic hertitage, but because the lack there of. In other words, many arts came from Muslims, not Islam (see the difference?).It seems like you could turn the argument around and claim that, e.g., the Enlightenment was a product of westerners but not of the West.
The european enlightenment came inspite of, not because of Islam. If the Crusades had not been called and Islam had spread to Europe, there would never have been a "golden age" for Europe, and we would all be living in the 18th century still.Islam did spread into Europe. The result was arguably the high-point of Iberian civilization.
Islamic law and the Koran simply do not allow for a Renaissance period such as the one in Europe.That didn't stop it from happening.
[Edited for brevity.]
-
Simply put, that is the PC version of history.
The sections on topics that I'm familiar with seem to be accurate enough.
No bigger evidence of this than to look at the West vs the Middle East in modern times.We aren't talking about modern times.
-
Uh, no Mr. President. History shows time and time again that Islam suppresed enlightenment. To say it "paved the way" is nothign but BS.
-
That was what I was referring to. But like anything else, a PSK can be brute-forced. I suppose someone could also use rainbow tables (if there are any) to accomplish a crack on the key.
I used to use (pseudo-)random 63 character passwords. You'd need large tables
-
Unfortuantely, WPA2 has shown its vulnerabilites and can be cracked, just like any of the other security protocols.
Details? Quick search only turned up a relatively difficult to exploit TKIP vulnerability.
-
was that not in the big patch just released by apple??
Nope.
-
As of now this is just a proof of concept there are no Mac exploits in the wild. And if a exploit does hit before Sun issues a patch remember never install a app you didn't download.
Sun fixed it last year. Apple hasn't rolled the fix into the OS X JRE.
-
Is there something else...anything that would work without having to install software on the other PC
You did say "anything".
-
Of course it improves security, just because its "easy" doesn't mean it doesn't improve security.
The probability that address filtering will prevent a network with WPA (or even WEP) enabled from being compromised is vanishingly small.
-
To improve security with other devices, set a MAC address filter to only allow certain MAC addresses onto your router.
MAC address filtering doesn't improve security. It's ridiculously easy to identify and spoof an allowed address.
-
A single ext3 partition for / should be fine. If the installer doesn't understand swap files you'll probably want a small swap partition, too; 512 MiB should be more than enough.
-
Our author's profile shows age 25 & a female avatar but has had a job for 30 years & now unemployed - hmmmm???
-
-
The masks are a wearable placebo. Surgical masks are supposed reduce the risk of infection (I don't know about painters masks) but right now the main benefit is psychological.
-
God help us. This isn't a technical debate: we're arguing about free will.
-
NetWork Drive: And you could have your BIOS infected before you bought the motherboard from someone else, what is your point? Just because it switches owners means it didn't require user interaction to become infected? Thats a bit silly =3
You missed the point on that one. The user-interaction occurs before the virus is present on the drive; the infection is a side-effect of automated processes (automatic network drive remounting, AutoRun, etc).
That bird comparison was very much farfetched.
You right: humans and birds have more in common than viruses and worms.
-
No, that was Bush's interpretation; that his election negated the US Constitution because he thought it is just a God Damned piece of paper. He repeatedly violated his oath of office and seriously degraded the Constitutional rights of US Citizens.
President Obama happens to be a Professor of Constitutional law and has repeatedly shown that he respects and values the US Constitution and will enforce it and obey it ; unlike his predecessor.
Their policies are almost indistinguishable. Obama's policies seem to be worse in some cases, e.g. wiretapping.
Bush should have been impeached and hung for high treason long before his first term ended.Bush didn't commit treason. Indeed, he's usually criticized for what was, at least superficially, essentially a 'War on Treason'.
-
First OSX Is certified UNIX.. http://www.apple.com/macosx/technology/unix.html (unix is a certification of compliance to a standard. Just Liek the Linux standards base.. )
They have a point about OS X and Unix. UNIX® certification doesn't mean that OS X doesn't suck.
it is running code in a buffer overflow which means it must be using logged in user permissions.. or is it system level and it matters not if the person is admin or not. (if so this is worse.. than I thought)It's a remote vulnerability. The advisories I looked at said it requires authentication on the target machine on NT 6 (but not NT 5) but didn't provide details.
-
I fail to see how a Boot Sector Virus doesn't fall under user interaction. You throw in a disk = user interaction, that's just like downloading or clicking a file. This is all user interaction... Maybe our definitions of "user interaction" are different, which may cause the arguments here.
Well, yes, because your definition is crazy. Everything requires some sort of user interaction. Your machine can't be infected unless you buy it, bring it home, set it up, turned it on, etc.
And then discover that there was a factory-installed boot sector virus on the HDD.
and autorun... again, where is the lack of user interaction here? How can you autorun something that wasn't there unless you downloaded/went to a website/dropped a disk in your tray?You could have a mapped network drive that's infected after it's mapped.
As for worms, yes they are a subclass of a virus, they do many of the similar things viruses do.People do many of the same things that birds do. People are not a subclass of birds.
-
Usage is a joke of an argument IMO, because Mac OSX is based on BSD (next was based on BSD and became Darwin) BSD is UNIX, and as such keeps a lot of things the in common with other Unix systems. This means that a hack written for any Unix system that is not kernel dependent work well on many different flavors of Unix.
I'm still not sure that cross-Unix viruses are especially practical. Native code viruses would likely have to deal with, e.g., the various object file formats used by Unices (ELF on Linux and the BSDs, Mach-O on OS X, COFF on AIX and Irix, etc) and non-native viruses would likely be portable to non-Unices.
Since we know the first user is always root and observation tells us that most people do not add accounts to the system and when they do, they do not create limited users.. we now know that a simple install exploit will work with just an OK prompt, or worse we could send RPC commands and since the system is operating as root/admin user those commands are ran as admin..Please tell me you mean LPC. The 'remote' part of RPC means that you can't rely on client-side security at all. I realize that there's some kind of law that RPC has to be broken but that would be a bit much.
(JCL who is a True expert in all he talks about)I make it all up as I go along.
-
So we'll ignore "worms" for the time being, which is technically a subclass of a virus but I place worms in their own separate category.
Worms and viruses are separate categories. They have practically nothing in common.
A virus on the other hand, requires full user interaction in order to initiate itself on a system. I have never heard a virus that can just automatically startup without some form of user interaction. Name a virus that can do that and I will back down from my statement?Boot sector viruses and AutoRun viruses.
-
-
also popularity is a joke answer and a excuse.. OSX is based on UNIX (bsd as a matter of fact) and UNIX system make up more than 55% of the installed market (just not desktop).
No way. Unix has maybe 15% of the PC market. The server market's something like 1/25th the size of the PC market, so that's at most another few percent.
a virus written to attack UNIX or Linux would most likely be able to affect all of them, so they are a bigger target and can effect more people.The near-complete lack of binary compatibility presents a bit of a problem. Source compatibility, too, for that matter; I don't think autoconf is an option for a virus.
-
Umm, there's been plenty of vote fraud long before electronic voting machines were invented. Intentional mis-counts, ballets "disappeared," questionable rejections, etc. I'm just sayin' ...
Vote fraud with paper ballots was a bug. With electronic voting machines it's a feature.
(I don't really care half as much about all this as it sounds.)
President Obama Working To Solve The Jewish Problem.
in World and Politics
Posted
No one is arguing that Islam should be credited for Western liberalism.
That's not an argument.