You can try this one instead.

1) 7zip is THE application for lossless, maximal compression. Speeding up 7z is a simple matter of setting for increased speed (decreased compression).

2) Error correction & recovery is done with parchive, not RAR. Even if winrar has a tweak that works in conjunction with parchive (which I am unaware of), rar archives are not more error resistant than 7zip.

Odd. I don't understand why people even use RAR anymore when there's 7z. I don't see this horde of clueless users dying for shredded archiving. And as far as I know, RAR isn't this gratifying user experience.

But the door is still secure!

Automated GUI WEP crackers? *sigh* I'm so 2005.

Naval mini-nuke reactor from 9595? Bullshit! Everyone knows the Sol system consumed all its easily mined nuclear fuel back in 3100's. And minuscule variations to keystrokes were crack by AIs back in the 3rd Millennium. And no self-respecting script kiddie would be hacking without anti-exothermic transfer shielding. My SSID? John_Connor .

This is Slashdot. We're all atheist Darwinists. I only wish natural selection upon any WEP user.

Apparently, I must have overlooked a paper; as did wikipedia.

Why do people here keep presuming WPA2/AES networks are (trivially) "crackable"???

As far as I know, only WPA/TKIP has a known weakness which allows one to hack out a key. WPA2/AES is only vulnerable to "dictionary" attacks (i.e. - if you don't have a retarded password key (hint: use a passPHRASE), you're not getting hacked in 2011.)

That's not to say that WPA2/AES will be found to be vulnerable at some point; but not today.

MAC-filtering on a WPA2/AES network is like putting duct tape over your state-of-the-art biometric access panel.

MAC-filtering will weed out the barely competent wifi crackers from script-kiddie level wifi crackers.

The script kiddie will follow the script, but not be able to figure out why the script works so well with this guy, but they're not able to get any authentication packets or why when the wepcrack generates a key, there's still no response when they try it. I have yet to see a "script" that factors in MAC-filtering steps.

But how many WEP-script-kiddies are there in your neighborhood?

The only correct answer is to use something better than WEP.

Actually, that would suck, and you don't know what you're talking about.

The C64 OS was a marvel of geek efficiency. If anything, the fact that C64 could run whole BASIC programs detracts from its elegance.

But the C language is an outdated, 3rd generation compiler language. It doesn't support new programming concepts. Its like trying to push for a return to COBOL.

Now, if you still have a working C64, what would be geek cool is run it using the FORTH language. Granted, FORTH is obsolete as well, but much better for writing for embedded devices than BASIC.

Plus, the Amiga was so overpriced, it never developed much of a nostalgia market. Cheaper than a Mac, at the time, but Apple was going through its retarded management as well.

You're being a little unfair to the fake-Commodore company.

The Commodore 64 was always about marketing hype. Trammiel rightly thought he could stick a piece of crap into every home if it was cheap enough. For many years, he was successful. He just couldn't get over the hump of competing with REAL computers for cheap.

No, the sad thing about fake-Commodore is that they really could have brought back the retro-product if it was cheap enough. It still would have been overpriced at $150, but fans could just use it to jury rig any low-end computing device, like an (overpriced) cheap Net TV, DVD player, and retro game machine. But an obsolete PC starting at $250?!?!? Just stupid, on their part.

What bothers me is that they could have successfully put out a much more marketable product for much cheaper if they had made more of an intelligent effort.

The odd thing is the C64 unit started near instanteously. You'd think vendors would want to sell that "instantaneous" feature for their computing devices today.

Find me these people "giving away" these 1541 floppy drives.

My problem is that my freaking 1541 died while sitting in a box! Went in working, 5 years later, took it out, and it was catatonic. An EE acquaintance and C64 buff thought the ROM chip went bad, and I probably could scrounge around for a replacement EEPROM, but screw that.

Many things about the C64 I have nostalgia towards, but the 1541 drive wasn't one of them. Took forever to load, even with those "fastload" cartridges. I do remember cutting notches in the floppies, to write on both sides (ha ha).