Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Breaks Jailbreak (Score 1) 94

by register_ax (#36927780) Attached to: Sniffer Hijacks SSL Traffic From Unpatched IPhones

Jailbreaking does not magically leave your phone wide open for attack.

Yes it does.

Jailbreaking requires you to write code to modify the bootstrap sequence. If you cannot do this, you must TRUST someone else will ENTER YOUR SYSTEM, and then LEAVE. You TRUST the program(s) they left behind (Cydia or equivalent) do not have any holes (like enabling telnet/ssh/trojan/something else bad by default) or, if they do (Strike 1), they will update their code appropriately and quickly (Strike 2 if they don't).

And that's only if you now use your phone as if it isn't jailbroken. If you want to install unsigned apps (reason most (everyone?) jailbreak), you leave yourself even more open to attack every unsigned app you install. That isn't to say you safe via Apple's signed process, but you are definitely not *safer* than without Apple. Unless you took *additional* precautions after jailbreaking, you must worry about leaving your phone anywhere as any technically minded person can get root access to your phone and install any sort of "bad" software!

Saying jailbreaking does not magically leave your phone wide open for attack is incredibly naive!

Comment: Re:There's more than one "fear of death" (Score 0) 473

by register_ax (#34449302) Attached to: People With University Degree Fear Death Less

I read your comment 3 times before realizing it had nothing to do with the comment AC left, but was a reply to the OP.

Why must people reply to a reply just to get their post higher up?

If internet avatars had human sentimentality, yours would be one of those emo dudes who go around trying to get people to notice them.

Comment: Re:Shoving what? (Score 2) 130

by register_ax (#34449270) Attached to: Wikipedia Pages Now On Amazon — With Product Links

Research? Who said anything about research? I was talking about completing papers for class. And it doesn't matter what I think or don't think about completing a classroom assignment - my grades speak for themselves. So far I see little difference in the pages anyway. It's just sad Wales didn't think to tap that mine before Amazon jumped his claim.

I think you're confusing "original research" with the type of research you do to complete assignments. In essence, by doing what you are saying the grades don't have to speak for themselves. It isn't a matter of doing well on assignments, it is how you complete the assignment. There's nothing really scholarly in what you are doing, which was ColdWetDog's point.

To understand (which you are clearly too young to understand), imagine a world without the internet or wikipedia. You would not be able to do a quick query, find a passage in a book, look up that single page on amazon, and use it as a reference in the assignment you are working on. You would have to do *scholarly research* to get the job done which is what you are NOT doing. This involves, going to the library, finding a category of the subject you are working on, choosing a selection of books and culling information from them not based on a few pages. As someone who has spent days on end doing this, and also done your way to quickly get an assignment done, the processes for each are world's apart.

I'm not really sure why you are depriving yourself of a really good opportunity to get an education. It's also disappointing that research is not an integral part of completing papers for your class. Why bother at all? If you are going to cheat, at least acknowledge that you *are* cheating. If you don't, it makes the people who actually do the work look bad.

Comment: Re:very disappointing, but perhaps inevitable (Score 1) 130

by register_ax (#34449194) Attached to: Wikipedia Pages Now On Amazon — With Product Links

A lot of experts have a problem with having no authority on Wikipedia and having to cite sources like anyone else.

Actually, a lot of experts in a field may be coming up with original research in the field, and thus have no authority to comment in the wikipedia article as no original research is permitted.

Comment: Re:very disappointing, but perhaps inevitable (Score 1) 130

by register_ax (#34449178) Attached to: Wikipedia Pages Now On Amazon — With Product Links

I stopped editing Wikipedia in 2005 or so. I can go back to articles in my subject (linguistics) that I used to follow, and I find mistakes that are still left there half a decade later. There have been plenty of edits in the meantime, but they've never fixed specific factual errors.

I really don't get it, why not just fixed those factual errors?? It sounds like you saw those errors in wikipedia in 2005 and never bothered to do anything with it other than acknowledge something is wrong. Then, recently, you read the same article and again noticed the same error you registered in 2005 but complain about it? When you say "they've never fixed" you do realize you are really saying I never fixed it right? Because "they" is "you"!

Why are you complaining over something you have control over? Just curious.

Comment: Re:Prior ASCII Art??? (Score 1) 369

by register_ax (#13145059) Attached to: Microsoft Frowned at for Smiley Patent
So that's informative huh? I guess we *are* on slashdot. In that case let me indulge a bit of what a small little bird once let me know. (This is all from memory so bare with me.)

(.)---(.) -- far apart

( . | . ) -- big and smushy (>=D)

(.Y .) -- oops, the tity seems to be distracted (lopsided)

(@)(@) -- large aerolas/nipple

o o -- A cup

. . -- Zero cup(?)

\o/\o/ -- saggy

(o)(%) -- extra nipple

(`o)(o) -- zit on breast

# (o) -- Mastectomy

(^)(^) -- perkys

(~)(~) -- pierced

{o}{o} -- muscular breasts

|O|O| -- 19th century kinda girl (corset breasts)

(>)(>) -- 1940s rocket breasts

(.Y.) -- Wonderbra

Caution: Use above only as a rough guide. It is advisable to get real world experience for expert identification.

What is worth doing is worth the trouble of asking somebody to do.

Working...