http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/how_to/4294038.html?page=1
This article explains how to recover files from a hard drive that has failed. There are two different ways that can ruin your files. You can have a logical failure or you can have a mechanical failure. The article explains that usually a hardware failure will result in a clicking sound when it is trying to access your files. The logical error can usually be fixed by just putting the drive in another computer as the slave drive, and downloading some recovery software. You can demo some recovery software on the internet before you buy so it shows how much data can be saved. The mechanical problem can be saved usually by taking it in to a specialist (anywhere from $500 to $2500). The article also has a funny "Worst case scenario page" about how they had a homemade "earthquake/flood doomsday scenario".
In general this was a great article, but they failed to mention the freezer trick. This will save you so much money. Instead of directly taking your hard drive to the specialist, try freezing it first. Just wrap it in some bubble wrap, freeze it overnight, and slave it on a working PC. http://geeksaresexy.blogspot.com/2006/01/freeze-your-hard-drive-to-recover-data.html
This could be some secret information that you can hold over your friends head for a free lunch. It works most of the time, and doesn't make things worse.
This article just goes to show how easy the computer really is to fix. Download some software, and let it run. Anyone can access computer information. It's not like you have to be an expert to do any of these "software fixes". Operating on a computer is like operating on a car, if you don't know how to do it already, someone else does that can tell you (not do it for you), or you can Google it. Usually it's an easy fix.
Monday, December 8, 2008
Monday, December 1, 2008
Journal #14, November 30
http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2008/1208/052.html?feed=rss_news
Most of the airport's wireless internet is unsecured. This is mostly not a big deal. If it cost over 20 thousand dollars to secure an airport I really don't think that the investment will be made by airports. They have other things they have to spend their money on, even though they do charge an arm and a leg for anything you buy. This is a good article that explains all the problems that airports are facing. They are stuck because they need wireless internet so they can run their business, but they don't want to secure it because it cost so much money. Now they might get hacked into and all sorts of information goodies could be taken. Seems like some sort of pickle. What would you do if you were the CEO of an airport. You either have to cut some spending on salaries or risk getting all your employees information stolen, and then you could be sued for who knows how much.
This is a great article. It seems like something you would find in "Ethics for the Information Age". I can already see the question "Is it wrong for David King to send hackers out for unsolicited security assessments?" Well my answer would be no. This seems like something that will help out airports. In the end David is just trying to make money by getting airports to buy his security. The byproduct of this, which turns the economy, is having the airports not waste their money, but protect themselves, and spend money. This will protect the people who work at the airport, and the customers, basically a win win unless you are the CEO of the airport.
You can't say that it's up to customers and employees to protect themselves, because most customers and employees expect that their e-mails sent at a wireless access point to be secure. If they get their information stolen, and find how it was because of the wireless security at an airport, I guarantee there will be a court date between customer and airport.
http://video.forbes.com/fvn/tech/tb_airhack111908
Most of the airport's wireless internet is unsecured. This is mostly not a big deal. If it cost over 20 thousand dollars to secure an airport I really don't think that the investment will be made by airports. They have other things they have to spend their money on, even though they do charge an arm and a leg for anything you buy. This is a good article that explains all the problems that airports are facing. They are stuck because they need wireless internet so they can run their business, but they don't want to secure it because it cost so much money. Now they might get hacked into and all sorts of information goodies could be taken. Seems like some sort of pickle. What would you do if you were the CEO of an airport. You either have to cut some spending on salaries or risk getting all your employees information stolen, and then you could be sued for who knows how much.
This is a great article. It seems like something you would find in "Ethics for the Information Age". I can already see the question "Is it wrong for David King to send hackers out for unsolicited security assessments?" Well my answer would be no. This seems like something that will help out airports. In the end David is just trying to make money by getting airports to buy his security. The byproduct of this, which turns the economy, is having the airports not waste their money, but protect themselves, and spend money. This will protect the people who work at the airport, and the customers, basically a win win unless you are the CEO of the airport.
You can't say that it's up to customers and employees to protect themselves, because most customers and employees expect that their e-mails sent at a wireless access point to be secure. If they get their information stolen, and find how it was because of the wireless security at an airport, I guarantee there will be a court date between customer and airport.
http://video.forbes.com/fvn/tech/tb_airhack111908
Monday, November 24, 2008
Journal #13, November 23
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,453125,00.html?sPage=fnc/scitech/cybersecurity
Basically a woman gave 400k dollars over the course of two years to a horrible e-mail scam. Follow the link at the bottom to see how ridiculous this scam really is.
This is what gives me energy. I love reading articles like this. It's funny because fox news tries to be impartial. I bet the entire time they were typing this article they were chuckling and the entire floor talked about it all day. This lady just takes the cake. Basically the internet is boiling down to cyberdarwinism. This is when *only* the people have an IQ greater than five will survive the web. This lady gives a whole new meaning to sucker. She would be clarified as a sucker if she would have given the whole 400k right away. But wait, there's more! She paid over two years. How can someone do this? I don't even get her reasoning at the end. She says "The hope is [other people] are not going to fall as hard as I fell,". Listen lady, if you didn't stop when not only your family, but your bank said it was a scam, then how would an article on the news stop you? Personally, it seems to me like a failed attempt to get insurance money. She was probably sending this to a bank account that was being cleaned out by a relative and they were splitting the money, then hoping for reimbursement. Although this would be dumb as well, I can't logically see how someone would give 400 thousand dollars to an unknown source for two years. What's funny is how this e-mail scam is sent out in all caps. "An e-mail in all caps, of course it's legit". I wonder how her husband didn't stop this madness. It's not like $100 was being spent on frivolous things every now and then, but thousands of dollars were leaving.
http://www.snopes.com/crime/fraud/nigeria.asp
Basically a woman gave 400k dollars over the course of two years to a horrible e-mail scam. Follow the link at the bottom to see how ridiculous this scam really is.
This is what gives me energy. I love reading articles like this. It's funny because fox news tries to be impartial. I bet the entire time they were typing this article they were chuckling and the entire floor talked about it all day. This lady just takes the cake. Basically the internet is boiling down to cyberdarwinism. This is when *only* the people have an IQ greater than five will survive the web. This lady gives a whole new meaning to sucker. She would be clarified as a sucker if she would have given the whole 400k right away. But wait, there's more! She paid over two years. How can someone do this? I don't even get her reasoning at the end. She says "The hope is [other people] are not going to fall as hard as I fell,". Listen lady, if you didn't stop when not only your family, but your bank said it was a scam, then how would an article on the news stop you? Personally, it seems to me like a failed attempt to get insurance money. She was probably sending this to a bank account that was being cleaned out by a relative and they were splitting the money, then hoping for reimbursement. Although this would be dumb as well, I can't logically see how someone would give 400 thousand dollars to an unknown source for two years. What's funny is how this e-mail scam is sent out in all caps. "An e-mail in all caps, of course it's legit". I wonder how her husband didn't stop this madness. It's not like $100 was being spent on frivolous things every now and then, but thousands of dollars were leaving.
http://www.snopes.com/crime/fraud/nigeria.asp
Monday, November 17, 2008
Journal #12, November 16
http://blog.wired.com/gadgets/2008/11/superspeed-us-1.html
There was some big news last week. USB is now going to be over 10 times faster than it already is! I love USB and now 10 times faster, this is insane. We have already been able to install graphic intensive games onto a USB and play them on pretty much any computer. This new USB is version 3.0. Right now we have 2.0 and I guess some people can't handle transferring 25 GB in 13.9 minutes. Well with this update solves that problem so that transfer drops to 70 seconds.
http://thefutureofthings.com/news/5739/25gb-in-70-seconds-with-usb-3-0.html
With this speed boost comes other great add-ons as well. Now there is a power boost from 100 milliamps to 900 milliamps. Basically, this will be a tiny, tiny amount more for a power bill (overall you bill will be lowered due to the better organization), but charge your phone a whole lot faster. Also with this new 3.0 there is better power efficiency. This basically helps out the optimization of USB. One of the big drawbacks of USB 2.0 was the power consumption. In 2.0 the computer had to check constantly if a USB was connected. Now with 3.0 the computer doesn't have to check, the USB will send a signal, which will significantly lower power consumption.
Now don't get all crazy excited just yet. You won't be able to plug in 3.0 in your computer and experience the speed. You will only see this speed boost when going from a 3.0 device to a 3.0 device. Even when you get a shiny new computer (that supports USB 3.0) and shiny new operating system (that supports USB 3.0) your hard drive will still not be able to transfer 25 GB of data in 70 seconds. This is why I was going nuts in the beginning, because that is fast!
This update will not be available right away. It is still in production and should be available around the end of 2009 or the beginning of 2010. Oh, P.S. say goodbye to firewire. This makes me sad because firewire had such a cool ring to the name.
There was some big news last week. USB is now going to be over 10 times faster than it already is! I love USB and now 10 times faster, this is insane. We have already been able to install graphic intensive games onto a USB and play them on pretty much any computer. This new USB is version 3.0. Right now we have 2.0 and I guess some people can't handle transferring 25 GB in 13.9 minutes. Well with this update solves that problem so that transfer drops to 70 seconds.
http://thefutureofthings.com/news/5739/25gb-in-70-seconds-with-usb-3-0.html
With this speed boost comes other great add-ons as well. Now there is a power boost from 100 milliamps to 900 milliamps. Basically, this will be a tiny, tiny amount more for a power bill (overall you bill will be lowered due to the better organization), but charge your phone a whole lot faster. Also with this new 3.0 there is better power efficiency. This basically helps out the optimization of USB. One of the big drawbacks of USB 2.0 was the power consumption. In 2.0 the computer had to check constantly if a USB was connected. Now with 3.0 the computer doesn't have to check, the USB will send a signal, which will significantly lower power consumption.
Now don't get all crazy excited just yet. You won't be able to plug in 3.0 in your computer and experience the speed. You will only see this speed boost when going from a 3.0 device to a 3.0 device. Even when you get a shiny new computer (that supports USB 3.0) and shiny new operating system (that supports USB 3.0) your hard drive will still not be able to transfer 25 GB of data in 70 seconds. This is why I was going nuts in the beginning, because that is fast!
This update will not be available right away. It is still in production and should be available around the end of 2009 or the beginning of 2010. Oh, P.S. say goodbye to firewire. This makes me sad because firewire had such a cool ring to the name.
Monday, November 10, 2008
Journal #11, November 9
http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/40085/128/
The big question: How many of these promises will he follow through on?
I have a problem with "Net neutrality". How can Obama say "a key reason the Internet has been such a success is because it is the most open network in history." and then want to regulate it through the Federal government. This seems to me like an excuse to exercise control on just one more aspect of our lives from the government. It's like people can't do anything without having to worry about the government. I agree with "McCain who wanted to let the private sector sort this out". This seems like it will spark innovation. Putting limits and laws on the internet will definitely hinder innovation.
On the next subject of "Broadband penetration" I agree to disagree. I think the broadband speed is good, but could be better. Do we really want to take tax dollars away from something else that is necessary and put it into something that doesn't matter nearly as much. I thought this would be one of the programs that Obama would "scalpel". I guess since he's president he gets to pick. Seriously, I don't think he's going to scalpel all too much. He's pretty much going to spend more money in hopes that this will spur growth and that the government will get the money back later.
With the third paragraph about the "Wireless Spectrum" I totally agree with. There really isn't that much competition. Sure there is a little bit, but who can beat DSL and other the other big companies. It's not like wireless internet is an easy business to get into, it's a lot harder than starting your own diner.
On "H-1B visas and offshoring" I agree with as well. This is a smart idea to take away tax breaks for companies that are going offshore with their jobs. If a company is going over seas for their jobs then most likely their company is big enough that they shouldn't need those tax breaks. Few big companies is always worse than a lot of smaller companies.
On the last paragraph about privacy I agree with as well. It was great too see how all of the internet junkies and kids out their voted for him. Later they will see those mail envelope that say they must pay a fine or appear in court because that same president they voted for also put in stricter laws against all these illegal downloaded songs.
Of course Obama was more technologically sound than McCain. There is evidence all over http://obamafortechnology.com/
The big question: How many of these promises will he follow through on?
I have a problem with "Net neutrality". How can Obama say "a key reason the Internet has been such a success is because it is the most open network in history." and then want to regulate it through the Federal government. This seems to me like an excuse to exercise control on just one more aspect of our lives from the government. It's like people can't do anything without having to worry about the government. I agree with "McCain who wanted to let the private sector sort this out". This seems like it will spark innovation. Putting limits and laws on the internet will definitely hinder innovation.
On the next subject of "Broadband penetration" I agree to disagree. I think the broadband speed is good, but could be better. Do we really want to take tax dollars away from something else that is necessary and put it into something that doesn't matter nearly as much. I thought this would be one of the programs that Obama would "scalpel". I guess since he's president he gets to pick. Seriously, I don't think he's going to scalpel all too much. He's pretty much going to spend more money in hopes that this will spur growth and that the government will get the money back later.
With the third paragraph about the "Wireless Spectrum" I totally agree with. There really isn't that much competition. Sure there is a little bit, but who can beat DSL and other the other big companies. It's not like wireless internet is an easy business to get into, it's a lot harder than starting your own diner.
On "H-1B visas and offshoring" I agree with as well. This is a smart idea to take away tax breaks for companies that are going offshore with their jobs. If a company is going over seas for their jobs then most likely their company is big enough that they shouldn't need those tax breaks. Few big companies is always worse than a lot of smaller companies.
On the last paragraph about privacy I agree with as well. It was great too see how all of the internet junkies and kids out their voted for him. Later they will see those mail envelope that say they must pay a fine or appear in court because that same president they voted for also put in stricter laws against all these illegal downloaded songs.
Of course Obama was more technologically sound than McCain. There is evidence all over http://obamafortechnology.com/
Monday, November 3, 2008
Journal #10, November 2
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20081028-first-look-at-windows-7.html
So windows is coming up with another operating system. Well this one looks pretty, but it is going to be more accepted than Vista? It does look like Microsoft really has improved the user interface. These new features look like it would actually be easier to navigate through the operating system.
http://gizmodo.com/5070219/giz-explains-why-windows-7-will-smash-vista
The above is also a good article about Windows 7. My main question's were answered.
"• If an application or device runs on Vista, it should run on Win 7.
• If a system runs Windows Vista, should run Windows 7 even faster.
• Notebooks should get better battery life in Windows 7.
• Windows 7 will be more reliable than Vista SP1 from Day 1."
So you can actually run Windows 7 with less than 1GB of ram! That's amazingly better than Vista. I never supported Vista from the beginning, if on the last principle alone. Vista was just too slow and clunky. Now there's a new streamline operating system out there that will look shiny and still be fast. I'm really enjoying the whole "smarter background management" which helps out speed, battery life, and memory use. This is the step that Microsoft needs to bump them up into the new generation.
I might go buy a new computer now with this new operating system. My computer is now over a year old, which means, basically it's obsolete. I hope I am not disappointed. To sum it all up, windows 7 should make your computer run cleaner, faster, longer, more user-friendly, and all-around better. I wish it was out now. This will really give apple some stress about upgrading their operating system, to be back ahead of Microsoft. We know that Apple has better security, and functionality now, but what about after Windows 7? Things are looking a little bit closer.
So windows is coming up with another operating system. Well this one looks pretty, but it is going to be more accepted than Vista? It does look like Microsoft really has improved the user interface. These new features look like it would actually be easier to navigate through the operating system.
http://gizmodo.com/5070219/giz-explains-why-windows-7-will-smash-vista
The above is also a good article about Windows 7. My main question's were answered.
"• If an application or device runs on Vista, it should run on Win 7.
• If a system runs Windows Vista, should run Windows 7 even faster.
• Notebooks should get better battery life in Windows 7.
• Windows 7 will be more reliable than Vista SP1 from Day 1."
So you can actually run Windows 7 with less than 1GB of ram! That's amazingly better than Vista. I never supported Vista from the beginning, if on the last principle alone. Vista was just too slow and clunky. Now there's a new streamline operating system out there that will look shiny and still be fast. I'm really enjoying the whole "smarter background management" which helps out speed, battery life, and memory use. This is the step that Microsoft needs to bump them up into the new generation.
I might go buy a new computer now with this new operating system. My computer is now over a year old, which means, basically it's obsolete. I hope I am not disappointed. To sum it all up, windows 7 should make your computer run cleaner, faster, longer, more user-friendly, and all-around better. I wish it was out now. This will really give apple some stress about upgrading their operating system, to be back ahead of Microsoft. We know that Apple has better security, and functionality now, but what about after Windows 7? Things are looking a little bit closer.
Sunday, October 26, 2008
Journal #9, October 26
http://timesunion.com/AspStories/story.asp?storyID=732745
So basically to give you a summary of the article, a boy "hacks" or walks through his school's "excellent" security system, and then e-mails the principal telling him that the security system was terrible. His principal then got the police to arrest the kid for "trespassing” unlawful possession of personal identification information and identity theft, all felonies.
What is going on here? The kid might as well have taken all of the information and sold it online. Both would end him up facing felonies in court. There is excellent teaching going on at this school. If a 15 year old kid breaks down your horrible security system, wouldn't you want to know? Don't shoot the messenger. It sounds like to me that the principal of that school is a hot head and it boggles my mind how someone could get in position to teach people when they are so ignorant themselves. The kid deserves a reward, not a jail sentence. I thought honesty was the best policy? Well that's thrown out the window.
The only way this would be different is if the kid sent an e-mail saying "Hey, I can hack into all your goodies, how much money are you going to give me for me not to say anything?" The story doesn’t say what his e-mail said. I'm sure it wasn't something harsh. If you’re smart enough to hack into a computer security system, you’re smart enough not to send an e-mail (from your e-mail address, or home ip, saying you want money). "The student charged has a history of computer mischief but likely was not interested in stealing personal information"
http://www.shenet.org/ is the website of the school and says "Posted 10/23/08
About
In the meantime, the district's Information Services Department (IMS) began to investigate and discovered that two high school students had accessed the file from an internal computer using their student password. Due to a configuration error, this file was not completely secured from student password access after being moved to a new server. IMS was able to determine that this was the only district "data” file that was impacted from this configuration error and accessed by these individuals.
The district takes great measures to secure our data and this breach is extremely troublesome. Once the investigation is complete those responsible will be punished according to our code of conduct and subject to possible criminal charges.
We will have reviewed our procedures and IMS has written an application that proactively reviews folder security permissions on all system folders. This will be run as part of the current IMS protocols for the routine system security and integrity process." This doesn’t even inform the website readers how the kid e-mailed the principal instead of proceeding to steal the information. This is horrible.
http://i300.photobucket.com/albums/nn15/thetruthtellerwithdangeleyes/HONESTY/honesty-3.jpg
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
