I saw on the news last night that Richmond got reamed by tropical storm Gaston.

Detta, any reports for us?  Saw some nasty flooding on the news and heard about a lot of property damage.

I ran across this on accident while I was doing a GIS.

Make sure you look through the archives... this stuff is pretty hilarious.

http://www.slowwave.com/

So my ISP informed me that it's their policy to banner paying customers' webpages.

I figured I'd make some banner ads of my own.

Then I thought, "hey... who else is really good at coming up with smartass things like this?"

Here I am.  

Animated GIFs are preferred, if you're capable of it.  I've got a few ideas of my own that I'll post once I finish them, but I want to see what the rest of you come up with first.

Here's the original:



Have at it.  

This happened on Saturday.

My brother-in-law Chad was playing his HackMaster character, by the name of Endegar.  Endegar is a cleric of the god of light.

My cousin Trav was playing a triple class Fighter/Magic-User/Thief, named Valador.

They had just walked into an abandoned keep rumored to be the lair of a colony of ghouls.

Valador:  (hands Endegar a torch) Here.  Light this.

Endegar: (casts light spell on it, causing the torch to glow brightly in a 20' radius)

Valador:    Uhhhhh.... that's not really what I meant.

Oh my.

Link

I ran across a link to this via a Yahoo message group -- I don't normally read anything from this site.

There is a lesson to learn in all of this. The Civil Libertarians are a relic of a time that has long since past. They, in the name of freedom and commerce, continually stand in the way of much-needed measures that aim to insure that every American has the opportunity to live free lives and pursue commerce.

So only by giving up our freedom can we live free?

HUURRRRRRR??

If the United States Congress were serious about protecting this country, it would explore:

• A National Identification Card
• A Domestic Intelligence Service
• Greater video surveillance at major cities and airports
• Greater monitoring of international communication done by online methods like e-mail
• The monitoring of all news services, news websites, and movies for messages and biases that encourage sympathy with terrorists or terrorist sympathizers.[/list:u]

(emphasis added)

 

I'm totally perplexed at how anyone can want to live in a totalitarian police state.

This guy's either a troll, or he's somehow mentally defective.  Seriously.  I don't say that just because I don't agree with him, but because he doesn't make logical sense.

Can someone explain this to me?

That's the problem with connecting to the IRC channel via a remote connection from where I work to my PC at home.

I think my cable modem needs rebooting, and it's about 17.5 miles away.

 

Anyone know how to remotely reboot a cable modem?

I'd like to get on a soapbox for a minute here and recommend a book to those of you that have never read it, or even to those of you who read it once a long time ago and may have forgotten about it.

The book I'm talking about is Hackers:  Heroes Of The Computer Revolution[/b], by Steven Levy.

I received my first copy of this book back in 1985 as a birthday present.  Considering what I was doing back then with much of my free time, it was perfect timing.

In early 1985 I was spending most of my time after school either working on coding/hacking anything I could think of on computers in my junior high school computer lab -- which at the time was filled with old Apple ][e's -- or coding/hacking anything I could think of on my own computer at home, a diminutive and underpowered Commodore VIC-20.

It was an incredible experience and I was continually fascinated more and more the more I learned.  I found joy and entertainment in writing programs, reverse-engineering other programs and games, coming up with games of my own, and figuring out ways of using what seemed like such powerful tools of technology.  A few friends of mine and I spent countless hours figuring out by trial-and-error how to get the Apple ][e computers to sing and dance, and whatever I figured out there, I would port backward into language my VIC-20 could understand and see if I could replicate the results.

I had no idea that what I was doing was really "hacking" in the original sense of the term, and I had no idea that I was not the only one to be so overwhelmingly hypnotized by the endless possibilities computers and technology offered.

When I got a paperback copy of "Hackers:  Heroes Of The Computer Revolution", I didn't really know what to think... I thought at first it was a novel, and a thick one at that (the original paperback version of this book was 480 pages in length).

It sat on my bookshelf in my room for months before I looked more closely at it.

When I finally did crack it open and begin reading, I was in awe.  This was a history of people that were doing just what I was doing.  They valued the things I valued.  They paved the way for the rest of us to have an easier time of accessing technology and the Hands On Imperative was sacred to them.

I devoured this book, and I shared it with my friends at the time.  This Steven Levy guy got it.  

He put down in black and white what we had never really been able to express in words.

The Hacker Ethic[/size]

• Access to computers - and anything which might teach you something about the way the world works - should be unlimited and total. Always yield to the Hands-On-Imperative!
• All information should be free.
• Mistrust authority -- promote decentralization.
• Hackers should be judged by their Hacking, not bogus criteria such as degrees, age, race, or position.
• You can create art and beauty on a computer.
• Computers can change your life for the better.[/list:u]
  That was in 1985.  At that pivotal time in my youth, that book, combined with my own insatiable thirst for understanding, changed my life, or at least my point of view on a lot of things.
  
  "Hackers", as a book, is more than just a brief history of technology from the early 1950's to the early 1980's... it's a manifesto that diagrams ideals that have far-reaching implications, even 20 years after its initial publication in 1984.
  
  I lost my original copy of this book years ago.  And it was out of print for years.
  
  Levy was able to work out a new deal with a publisher last year, however, and it's back in print, and I bought a new copy and just finished reading it again, almost 20 years after the first time it held my attention with an iron grip.
  
  It is even more relevent today than it was 20 years ago.  It reads like a prophetic guide to the rise of open source.  It makes one think that it is inevitable that with the proliferation and ubiquitousness of technology, personal computers, and more and faster ways of sharing information that free software, free ideas -- not secret, proprietary, hidden -- will be the way things will be.
  
  Steven Levy wrote back in 1984 about programmers writing code and letting other programmers look at it, improve on it, and distribute it.  He wrote about people being appalled and disgusted by the idea of not distributing or allowing access to source code for applications, games, or other programs.
  
  He was writing about something that hadn't happened yet (the Open Source movement), and yet had been going on since the beginning.
  
  I think we're living in a brief island of closed source dominance in a sea of free information.  
  
  Read this book.

Over on LinuxQuestions.org and on most other Linux forums I've seen, it seems like the overwhelming majority of Linux users use Mozilla as their primary browser.

Myself, I've always found Mozilla to be slow, kind of cumbersome in how it functions, slow, occasionally buggy and inexplicably unstable at times, and slow.  But mostly slow.

In spite of my initial feelings about Mozilla, however, I thought that maybe I was just missing something, so for the past week and a half or so, I've been forcing myself to use Mozilla while in Linux (instead of my usual choice, Opera) to see why people think it's so much better.  I'm using the default version of Mozilla that came with Slackware Linux 9.1 (which is Mozilla 1.5).

And my conclusion?

I don't get it.

Here is my basic breakdown (the version of Opera I'm using for comparison is a licensed Opera 7.50 Final):

OPERA
Cosmetics

• Many, many more skins available
• Skins can be switched to on the fly, without restarting browser
• In addition to skinning your browser, there are also nine different default color schemes that can add to your customization
  
• Toolbar buttons can be moved around, removed, different ones added (in other words, you can customize your toolbar at will)
• There's a rather annoying banner built into Opera's interface, but it goes away if you buy a license key (which is cheap)[/list:u]
  
  Functionality
  
  • Faster than any other browser I've tried
  • Stable (no unexpected "POOF!  Your browser just shut itself down for no apparent reason!" incidents)
  • Mouse gestures!  I don't use many (there are tons of them built into Opera), but the "back", "forward" and "refresh" gestures I use constantly.  Very convenient.  Don't have to click on toolbar buttons or touch the keyboard to accomplish the same thing.
    
  • 100% Tabbed browsing if I want it.  I like tabbed browsing.  Click on a link that normally opens a new window, and in Opera it opens a new tab for me instead.  Less clutter.
  • Speaking of tabbed browsing, Opera has a feature that lets you hold down the right button and use the wheel on your mouse to scroll through the tabs you currently have open.  I like that as well.
  • More on tabbed browsing... holding down the shift key while clicking a garden variety link opens the link in a new tab instead of the same window.
  • Did I mention fast?  Opera's really fast.[/list:u]
    
    MOZILLA
    Cosmetics
    
    • Not nearly as many skins available.  Had to dig around other sites to find them (other than Mozilla's site).  Not to mention, the skins available are really not that great.  Nowhere NEAR the variety of Opera.
    • Skins can't be switched to on the fly.  Have to restart browser for different skin to take effect.
    • No color schemes.
    • Default toolbar buttons cannot be moved around, removed, or have different buttons added.  Don't like the buttons the way they are?  Tough.
      
    • Mozilla is 100% free, with no ads, without having to pay for it.  That's nice.[/list:u]
      
      Functionality
      
      • Mozilla is actually SLOWER than any other browser I've tried.  This past week and a half has been kind of miserable.  Mozilla seems to take FOREVER to load some pages that I'm used to instant results from with Opera.
        
      • Seems kind of unstable at times.  I've had it lock up on me twice where the only way I could navigate was by right clicking and selecting "back" or "forward"... the toolbar buttons stopped working.
      • NO Mouse gestures!   I constantly find myself right-clicking and moving my mouse slightly left in order to move back a page in history, only to find a menu pop up, from which I have been selecting "back" instead.  
      • The tabbed browsing seems a bit half-assed at best.  Sometimes Mozilla will still open pages in an entirely new window, even though I have the "open new windows in tabs instead of new windows" option checked.  Add to this the inherent tendency of Mozilla to be sloooooow to begin with, and this just irritates me to no end.
      • Had to download and install a goofy plugin in order to get Mozilla to use tabs more effectively.  Without this plugin, the tab bar doesn't show unless you have more than one tab open... unfortunately the "new tab" button only shows up on the tab bar...
      
      
      Since there's no way to customize the tool bar to add the "new tab" button (like I do in Opera), opening a new tab is a pain in the ass.
      
      
    • Speaking of tabbed browsing, Opera has a feature that lets you hold down the right button and use the wheel on your mouse to scroll through the tabs you currently have open.  Mozilla has no such thing.  If you want to go to a different tab, you click on it.  End of story.
    • More on tabbed browsing... In Opera, holding down the shift key while clicking a garden variety link opens the link in a new tab instead of the same window.  In Mozilla, it opens a stupid "save as" dialogue!
    
    
    In EVERY other browser I've ever tried, holding down "shift" (or sometimes "control") while clicking on a link opens the link in a new window!  Why does Mozilla go counter to that basic functionality?  
    
    I know, this is just "different", not necessarily "worse"... but it's annoying.  Mostly because there doesn't seem to BE a way to open a link in a new window/tab without right-clicking on the link and selecting "open in new tab".[/list:u]
    
    I know, these seem like minor things.  But they add up to an experience I find less than satisfactory.  Opera is faster, has far more options for customization, far more flexibility, more stable, and has more features.  Mozilla, by contrast, seems not to have made any real significant advances in years... it seems stunted and out-of-date.  And I don't mean like "I'm using version 1.5 of Mozilla, which is a year or so old".  I mean using Mozilla is like using something made in 1998, by people who haven't paid attention to some of the things that just about every other browser out there has done to spiff up their interface and features (even crappy ones, like Konqueror seem to have more going for them than Mozilla).
    
    I think I'll be sticking with Opera.  I don't understand why so many Linux users swear by Mozilla... it doesn't even come close.  *shrugs*

Oh yeah.... got this one out of the way early today.


Our Receptionist:  Sorry Demosthenes, but I've got <some jerk> on the phone from <client> and they're having a Novell problem and Steve's out of the office.

Me:  I don't know anything about Novell.  Can't you just put him into Steve's voice mail?  Steve's the only Novell guy here.

Receptionist:  I know... but he's insisting on talking to someone.

Me:    All right.  You know I'm just going to transfer him to Steve's voice mail, right?

Receptionist: Yeah, I know.  Okay, here he is.

BEEP

Me:  Good morning, this is Demosthenes.

Jerk:  I just got a message in my logon routine that says "Netware cannot authenticate, invalid path or file name".  Do you know what that means?

Me:  No, but Steve does, and he'll be in the office in just a few minutes.  I can put you into his voice mail...

Jerk:  No.  I need to talk to someone right now that can fix this.

Me:  At the moment, there isn't anyone here that knows anything about Novell.  Steve is our Novell guy, and he had to drop something off at a different client's office on his way into work this morning, and he'll be here in a few minutes.

Jerk:  Well I need someone to fix this RIGHT NOW.

Me:  I can have Steve give you a call when he gets in.  What's your--

Jerk:  What's Steve's cell phone number?

Me:  I don't know.  (I'm actually not supposed to give it out)

Jerk:  Then tell me what to do to fix this error.

Me:  Sure.  The first thing you need to do is leave Steve a voice mail.  Step two is to wait for a few minutes for Steve to get here, check his voice mail, and call you back.  Step three is Steve telling you what to do to fix the problem.

Jerk:  Don't take that tone with me, you fucking smartass.

Me:  No problem, sir.  I can give you Steve's voice mail and he'll get back to you.  Have a good morning!


*transfers call to Steve's voice mail*



I don't envy Steve the voice mail this jerk probably just left for him, but something tells me this guy would have been a jerk no matter what.  

Linkage

Apple has a shortage of viable competitors in the MP3 player biz... if you don't want an iPod, you have to settle with other things that for the most part are vastly inferior.

This Commodore player actually sounds pretty cool though.  It looks cool too.

20gb hard drive, USB connection, MP3, WMA and WAV support, works with Linux, Mac and Windows without having to h4x0r anything, 10-15 hour rechargeable battery life.

Hell, if the thing weighs in at less than $350, I think they definitely have a winner.

The PATRIOT Act has some serious implications to anyone concerned about individual rights being largely relegated to secondary or tertiary status in favour of a more "secure" state of affairs in this country.

And those implications and concerns are valid... they're the main reason why others like myself have been as outspoken as possible in pointing out the dire damage to our liberties and privacy the PATRIOT Act has already done and could still potentially do if these implications are not addressed with reference to the US Constitution very shortly.

But there is another concern that I don't think is getting the coverage it deserves.

There IS a safety concern with the PATRIOT Act.  Because it essentially ignores certain rights and gives the Federal Government almost carte blanche to tread roughshod over due process and significant portions of the Bill of Rights, there stands a very real danger of individuals being convicted under the PATRIOT Act of being set free.

Don't get me wrong here... I think the bulk of the people being held right now by the government in connection with terrorism are probably not very safe to just let go.

But because of the inherent unconstitutionality of the means the government is using to hold, interrogate, and try these people, the likelihood is that any of them that actually is found guilty will have their cases overturned on appeal in a heartbeat.

And set free.

This administration's insistence on differentiating between people deserving of human rights recognition and "enemy combatants" is going to lead to MORE terrorists on the loose, not fewer.

This article demonstrates the kind of thing that can happen, from a judicial perspective.  Take this bit, for example:

Two other justices, David H. Souter and Ruth Bader Ginsburg, would have gone further and declared Hamdi's detention improper. Still, they joined O'Connor and the others to say that Hamdi, and by extension others who may be in his position, are entitled to their day in court.

Hamdi and Padilla are both scumbags that most certainly should NOT be on the loose.

But because of the governments overzealous methods in apprehending them and holding them indefinitely without a trial, charges, or access to counsel, that is quite likely going to be the case.

This administration's stance on being tough on terrorism is likely going to lead to MORE terrorists being free to go on technicalities.  Likewise, most of the individuals being held in Guantanamo will have a chance to get themselves cut loose as well.

And is this the court's fault?  Not at all.  It is the fault of the tactics used by the government to hold them.  Most of those prisoners at Gitmo are pretty awful, and are probably a danger to the world at large if set free.

But if given prisoner of war treatment or access to a fair trial, their likely disposition would not be dangerous... they would either be turned over to their former government (now an Afghan government that supports our efforts) or would be imprisoned as terrorists after a trial that would most likely lead to convictions for them and lengthy prison sentences.

But since they've been held for 2+ years without counsel, charges, or any heed at all paid to their rights, as soon as they complain in a legal sense about that injustice at the hands of the US government, they will likely be set free.

I just don't see how that makes us "safer".  Ignoring civil rights and human rights does not put more people who would do us harm "out of the way".  It just ensures that when the courts finally do have access to them, they will be liberated.

That doesn't help at all.

Right about now, I'd hate to be a Federal Prosecutor.

Prosecutor: Your Honor, I have these charges that we are now ready to file against the defendant, Jose Padilla--

Judge:  And you've held him for how long now?

Prosecutor:  Er.... uh, two years.  A little more than that, actually--

Judge:  And when he asked for counsel during interrogations, was he provided with access to an attorney?

Prosecutor:  Uh... no.  But he's an "enemy combattant" and has no right to--

Judge:  *waves hand*  Myself and the Constitution beg to differ.  And was he given any kind of chance to provide for his own defense?

Prosecutor:  Um... no, but--

Judge:  Ever charged him before now?

Prosecutor:  No, but--

Judge:  Given opportunity to even have bail set?

Prosecutor:  No, we never--

Judge:  And where is the warrant to perform the search and wiretaps with which all this evidence you are presenting was obtained?

Prosecutor:  Well, you see, under the PATRIOT Act, we don't have to present a warrant publically, because--

Judge:  So all of this evidence was gathered without benefit of a valid warrant?

Prosecutor: No... I mean--

Judge:  Case dismissed.  The defendant is free to go.

Ivan had a thread over on HN like this ages ago.

My best hack lately involves a particular piece of software that I'm responsible for implementing on our clients' servers when they buy it.

This software (which isn't written by us, thank Pepe), is a pile of crap.  It's also totally, 100% without documentation of any kind.

The first time I did a scheduled install of this software for a client, I was two hours into the process when I ran into a nasty problem.  It wouldn't find any of the data it was supposed to be using for reporting.  I called the senior developer at the company that makes this piece of shit software and he told me, "yeah, all the data that it accesses must be in a common directory".

The main accounting product that we support that this piece of shit program is an add-on to sets up the data environment in subdirectories separated by module... so your Accounts Payable tables are all in a subfolder called "APDATA" and your Accounts Receivable tables are all in a subfolder called "ARDATA", and all of your Inventory Control tables are in a subfolder called "ICDATA", and so on.

This is something they could have told us BEFORE I was two hours into an install that I was already doing without the benefit of any documentation.  

Anyway, I just did another one.  This client apparently wasn't briefed on the requirements either, and I came to a screeching halt immediately and told them "all of your data needs to be moved into a common folder".

Which is more difficult than it sounds.  A zillion other things that depend on this data staying put need to be adjusted manually in order to accommodate this.

Well, it was out of the question for these guys.  And, the idiots that they were, they had purchased this stupid program from us without anything more than a demo of it, not even finding out what the requirements of it were and whether or not it would be feasible to implement it easily on their own server/network.

I came up with a workaround for them that's quite ingenious if I do say so myself.

I discovered that this program doesn't JUST have to reference a common folder... it can reference a DBC -- a database container -- that in turn references all of the individual tables.

So I wrote this particularly devious code to pull pathing data out of one of their default system tables and dump it into a DBC, which I will then point this stupid piece of shit application to.

SET DELETED ON

CREATE DATABASE xxData

lc_dir    = LOWER(SYS(5) + ADDBS(CURDIR()))

USE sycpath ALIAS a_sycpat SHARED
SCAN
   lc_string = [CREATE SQL VIEW ] + LOWER(ALLTRIM(tablid) + ALLTRIM(compid)) +;
               [ AS SELECT * FROM ] + ALLTRIM(cdosdbf) + ALLTRIM(tablid) + ;
               ALLTRIM(compid) + [.DBF]

   &lc_string.
ENDSCAN

I tested it in-house and it works.  Pretty L337.  

Okay.  So what's your best hack?  Doesn't have to be computer-related.  It transcends even technology if it's done in the true spirit of hack.