begood

Plus o tzava decenta. Ce ati face voi cu ei ? Cum as putea ajuta comunitatea RST ? Postati aici. PS : nu ma intereseaza banii.

sariti ! 55afdae8d858bcb3a97b7b0e8e6fd43c a3a53d7548d0c23bfcd1a8885f064d1f a14e68e717b4612829a8d82782d42ab1

i can talk myself out of anythin'. if not, nu astept primul pumn.

Thank you. M-am uitat in diagonala peste cele in romana, foarte bune.

ban Lubbock

In functie de suma ce trebuie s-o scoti... o idee banala ar fi sa actionezi ca mai sus. Te rogi de cineva ca vezi doamne ti-ai uitat buletinul acasa si ca vrei sa primesti bani de la pisica suedia sa-ti platesti chiria or some bullshit.

A federal judge backed the music storage-locker business model Monday while ruling that companies may develop services that store their customers’ songs in the cloud. The closely watched case brought by EMI against MP3tunes comes as Amazon and Google recently launched similar services without the music labels’ consent. Apple is expected to launch a cloud-storage service with the labels’ blessing perhaps as early as next month. U.S. District Judge William Pauley III said the MP3tunes service was protected by the Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998. “If enabling a party to download infringing material was sufficient to create liability, then even search engines like Google or Yahoo! would be without DMCA protection. In that case, the DMCA’s purpose — innovation and growth of internet services — would be undermined,” (.pdf) the judge wrote. Pauley added that “MP3tunes’ online storage system utilizes automatic and passive software to play back content stored at the direction of users. That is precisely the type of system protected by the DMCA safe harbor.” The judge said his ruling was based on the same law that has allowed YouTube to flourish. The judge added, however, that MP3tunes was liable for the infringement of about 350 songs via its sideload.com site, which could potentially cost MP3tunes millions of dollars in damages at trial. Michael Robertson, the site’s founder, was considering appealing that portion of the 29-page opinion. “We’re not happy with losing the 1 percent of the ruling that we did. We’ll look at it to see where we go from here,” Robertson said in a telephone interview. The DMCA gives internet service providers immunity from infringement if they remove material at the request of a rights holder, the judge noted. But MP3tunes did not adequately respond to EMI’s request, Pauley said. Sideload allows MP3tunes customers the ability to search the internet for free songs. EMI asked MP3tunes to remove the infringing songs from customers’ storage lockers, but MP3Tunes did not. Instead, MP3tunes removed the links to those songs from the Sideload site, but allowed its customers to store the song if they downloaded it before the link was removed. EMI did not immediately respond for comment. Judge OKs Unlicensed Cloud Music-Storage Service | Threat Level | Wired.com

Cheating at Casinos with Hidden Cameras Sleeve cameras aren't new, but they're now smaller than ever and the cheaters are getting more sophisticated: In January, at the newly opened $4-billion Cosmopolitan casino in Las Vegas, a gang called the Cutters cheated at baccarat. Before play began, the dealer offered one member of the group a stack of eight decks of cards for a pre-game cut. The player probably rubbed the stack for good luck, at the same instant riffling some of the corners of the cards underneath with his index finger. A small camera, hidden under his forearm, recorded the order. After a few hands, the cutter left the floor and entered a bathroom stall, where he most likely passed the camera to a confederate in an adjoining stall. The runner carried the camera to a gaming analyst in a nearby hotel room, where the analyst transferred the video to a computer, watching it in slow motion to determine the order of the cards. Not quite half an hour had passed since the cut. Baccarat play averages less than six cards a minute, so there were still at least 160 cards left to play through. Back at the table, other members of the gang were delaying the action, glancing at their cellphones and waiting for the analyst to send them the card order. Schneier on Security: Cheating at Casinos with Hidden Cameras

https://www.facebook.com/safety/attachment/Guide%20to%20Facebook%20Security.pdf

We're all busy, but one way to make sure you get a response even from some of the busiest people you want to communicate with is to be topical, be concise, and to organize your message so it's easy to respond to. We've discussed ways to keep your email messages brief, but if you're sending a note to someone who gets hundreds of messages a day, it'll take more to make it stand out. Over at Passive Panda, James Clear has a few tips to help you make sure your message gets a response, but one of the best is to be brief and arrange your message in bullets or specific questions you'd like a response to. This way the recipient can easily digest your message and insert responses to your questions without having to wade through it. He even includes examples. He also has a number of other tips, like remembering to be thankful and realistic about what you need, and of course, to not expect a response-nothing will ensure you never get a reply like a dozen follow-ups asking if your first note went through. How do you cut through your recipient's inbox and get a reply? If you get a lot of mail, how do you pick the ones you respond to? Share your thoughts in the comments. Photo by Ramanan V. How To Email Important People | Passive Panda

parola se introduce in locul textului albastru

If you need to have an encrypted, private chat but don't have the tools handy to do so, you can just use Cryptocat. While anyone will be able to enter the chatroom if they know its name, nobody without your secret key will be able to see what you're saying. To get started, you choose a chatroom name on the Cryptocat site and then share that name with anyone you want to talk to. You'll also need a secret key that both you and anyone else in the conversation knows. Cryptocat chatrooms feature a little blue bar at the bottom where you can type that key. If your key matches the key of someone else, your chat messages will be revealed to one another. If not, they'll just show up as "encrypted." Aside from its usefulness, everything is wonderfully 8-bit. You can even turn on chiptune chat alerts (although they only seem to work in Firefox and not Chrome). If you need to have a private, text-based conversation practically anywhere, Cryptocat makes the process really simple. Cryptocat ------------- am creat un chat room : https://crypto.cat/?c=rst parola de azi este : 5nwl0.23

i lol'd. trashed.

Currently this list contains five websites and we hope it grows as time pass and also accept our readers contributions. All these sites perfom SQLI scan and give output in same window. Which then needs to be read and identify the vulnerabilty in output. To use these sites we need to have some knowlage about sql injection and techniques List of Online SQLi Scanners

"Homomorphic computing makes it possible to compute with encrypted data and get an encrypted result, something that could make cloud services more secure. Such systems have so far been mathematical proofs, but researchers at Microsoft now say that stripped down versions able to only compute certain mathematical functions are efficient enough to be used today. They built prototype software capable of calculating statistical functions using encrypted data and say it could be used for processing medical data while protecting privacy." Microsoft Demonstrates Practical Homomorphic Computing - Slashdot

le-am trimis deja pe cele trei, cere-i lui m2g una, poate primesti.

trimis. .

Curiosity is like one of those shows that recreates famous Bible stories for children, usually with a modern child as the guide through the tale, only it’s been made for the children of skeptics. The very first episode is all about whether God exists, and the guide through the exploration of that question is Stephen Hawking. If you know anything about Hawking or his views on things, you already know how this is going to end up, but it’s still sort of amazing to see a show more or less give the man who’s likely the foremost scientific mind of our age an hour of TV time to rip apart the underpinnings of religious faith. If you want to believe in God, Hawking all but says, fine, but he’s not going to leave you any sort of room to maneuver. You’re pretty much just believing for the sake of doing so. It’s kind of a pity, then, that the show around Hawking is kind of a bore. For a man who has such a relentlessly inquisitive mind and a man who builds his case both simply and compellingly by the end of the hour, the first episode of Curiosity plods forward at a snail’s pace, constantly stopping to make sure everybody is caught up on whatever Hawking is saying. Hawking, of course, is very good at coming up with metaphors for the complex processes he’s describing, but the show itself spends too much time on fairly rudimentary stuff, like the history of science’s relationship with religion (including an extended digression into Galileo’s battles with the church), when it could be more freewheeling in its explanation. Without other episodes of Curiosity to examine, I don’t know if this will be the case going forward or if this is just the story Hawking wanted to tell, but a show that could be as interesting as this one shouldn’t settle for the usual TV tricks. Curiosity is a new series from Discovery Channel’s founder, John Hendricks, and the idea behind the show (which received a five-season, 60-episode pickup earlier this year) is that various celebrities or guest hosts will lead viewers down the road to answers from some pretty basic questions like “Will we find a way to live forever?” or “Are we alone in the universe?” or “Why is sex so fun?” (That last is asked by Maggie Gyllenhaal, coquettishly, in the trailer for the program.) Over the course of each hour, the show will purportedly examine the question from every angle, then pull back for a wider view at the end that hopefully gives the best guess science can offer at an answer to the question. When I lay it out like that, it sounds like it could be quite a fun show, sort of a RadioLab for television. But Curiosity’s chief failing is RadioLab’s chief strength: Curiosity fails to be significantly wide-ranging, choosing instead to focus so narrowly that it’s constantly repeating itself. Early on in tonight’s episode—where the question is “Was the universe created by God?”—there’s lots and lots of talk about how primitive our ancestors were and how they believed in wolf gods that ate the sun during an eclipse and so on and so forth. And that’s all well and good. But this entire segment—which takes up nearly a third of the episode’s running time—seems like the show vamping for time, examining a subject related to the central question without really making a case for why we should be talking about it. This gives the show the unfortunate feeling of taking forever to get to the point, and it would be easy to check out. It’d be one thing if the show seemed aimed at adults, but it doesn’t, not really. The story of Galileo’s battles with the church will be familiar to most grown Discovery viewers (or at least I’d hope it would), and the quality of the visual effects, production values, and historical reenactments (sigh) are the sorts of things that should be far more interesting to young scientific minds. (And it’s easy to see kids being sort of ickily entertained by watching a 12th century pope get his body crushed by a collapsing roof.) And yet by the time Hawking is discussing whether or not time existed before the Big Bang, the show has leapt right past the goofy reenactments to questions at the heart of quantum mechanics. If the episode were doing the thing where it gradually increases the learning curve, so things get more and more complex, that’d be one thing. But the episode starts as a nice, gentle climb, then abruptly runs into a wall. Still, there’s a core of a very good show here, and if Discovery is smart about working through the various issues the first episode has, this could be must-watch television. Plus, the fact that every episode will be tackling a different subject with a different host could make things that much more varied and interesting, to the point where individual episodes could prove to be wildly varying in quality, based on whomever’s in front of the camera and behind it. In a way, this could end up being something like Discovery’s version of that ESPN series 30 For 30, and though the network is giving the show something of a promotional push, it’s clear that it’s mostly been put on the air as a kind of passion project, something that everybody who works at Discovery can point at and say, “We’re proud of that.” And, really, even though this episode doesn’t work as well as it should, it’s still something that blatantly tries to educate, with surprisingly few frills. And that’s rare on TV today. Plus, it’s one of the few shows out there to take a genuinely agnostic view of the universe. Hawking is seriously going to examine the evidence in favor of the existence of God, then bluntly deliver the results to us. Outside of his occasional feints toward, “Everyone is free to believe whatever they want,” as well, he’s unapologetic in the fact that he finds nothing to suggest that we need attribute the creation of the universe to God. (That’s a spoiler, I guess, but if you know anything about Hawking, it shouldn’t be.) TV is a medium that’s so relentlessly devoted to making everybody feel like they’re at home and accounted for that it’s rare to see something this bracing. And for all of its many faults, that sets Curiosity apart. Any time TV tackles a question and delivers an answer that’s unequivocally straightforward and direct, that’s worth being excited about. Stray observations: I don’t know if this is the program itself doing this or just the screener I was sent, but it’s worth pointing out. Hawking supposedly narrates the whole program, but at various, awkward times, his computerized voice will be replaced by a more mellifluous British narrator. It’s possible that this is just a screener issue—and I sort of think it might be, since the British guy would take over mid-sentence sometimes—and I hope it is. It’d be ridiculous to replace Hawking on the soundtrack. Everybody knows what he sounds like. May as well just go with it. Discovery will apparently be sending out more episodes, so I'll take a look at those. If they're better, I'll do a follow-up post to this one. http://www.avclub.com/articles/curiosity,60040/

trimis denjacker check this out : www.gigapedia.com

am schimbat regulile "jocului" din primul venit, primul servit in dau la cine cred eu ca merita. surge ai primit, danielnibu nu primesti, prea putine posturi.

mai am 3 invitatii, postati daca va intereseaza.

Home | inventeaza.ro de la anu' s-ar putea sa ma bag si eu.

Learn Ruby The Hard Way | Learn Ruby The Hard Way

Invisible to radar, a drone flies over a city, while a hacker uses it to attack the cellphone network, spy on the ground and monitor Wi-Fi networks. But this is no stolen military vehicle. It is a homemade drone built for just a few thousand dollars using parts legally bought on the internet. Homemade drone to help phone and Wi-Fi hackers - tech - 05 August 2011 - New Scientist

Defcon 2011 is in full hacking swing, and Itzhak Avraham -- "Zuk" for short -- and his company Zimperium have unveiled the Android Network Toolkit for easy hacking on the go. Need to find vulnerabilities on devices using nearby networks? The app, dubbed "Anti" for short, allows you to simply push a button to do things like search a WiFi network for potential targets, or even take control of a PC trojan-style. To do this, it seeks out weak spots in older software using known exploits, which means you may want to upgrade before hitting up public WiFi. According to Forbes, it's much like Firesheep, and Zuk refers to Anti as a "penetration tool for the masses." Apparently, his end-goal is to simplify "advanced" hacking and put it within pocket's reach, but he also hopes it'll be used mostly for good. Anti should be available via the Android Market this week for free, alongside a $10 "corporate upgrade." Consider yourself warned. Android Network Toolkit lets you exploit local machines at the push of a button -- Engadget