|
Iranian Election: The Revolution Will Be Youtubed (pg. 24)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Krypton |
| quote: | Originally posted by The17sss
As an actual "conservative" in the true meaning of the word, I'm wondering why you are choosing to continually use that word now to describe the regime. Seems like a veiled attempt and trying to give that word as we know it some negativity. I haven't seen anyone ever refer to the Iranian regime as "the conservative government." Why don't you stop the foolishness and just accurately call them "the oppressive, brutal, dictatorial leaders", intead of trying too hard to be politically correct? |
Conservatism is advocacy of traditional values. They want little to no change from the status quo. The Iranian government fits that definition to the letter. |
|
|
| josh4 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Shakka
I fail to understand your need to respond with arrogant condescension because some of us haven't yet achieved your level of enlightened super-intelligence, but I digress.
I wasn't trying to present an article that I thought was somehow a new authority or full of new information, rather it is just the most recent news piece from a non-U.S. source with a slightly different perspective. Perhaps you assumed I was.
I think we all know what the real story is Josh. I don't think we've all been waiting with baited breath for you to come and tell us what's really happening in Iran. |
So in other words, you agree with me.
Don't confuse my tell it like its attitude with condescension. Then again, inferiority is perceptual so I'm sorry if my super-intelligence intimates you.
What I've been reading is wishful Western thinking trying to find silver linings in an unfortunate situation. "Yeah the reformists might not get their way but they sure did show that supreme leader where to stick it!" Ugh. My problem is mostly with the media trying feed us this garbage and calling it analysis. That may be so but nothing is going to change there unless the people can really stand up to the government. Color me disappointed with frustration. Not to take anything away from the Iranians, kudos for trying and more power to them. |
|
|
| DrUg_Tit0 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Fir3start3r
I actually I was reading in some other forums that the DDOS attacks are not a good idea at the moment; Iranians are having enough problems with getting information out of their own country without having to fight for bandwidth from DDOS attacks from the outside.
In short; don't do it please!! |
Yes, I've read that too, but I think it's either gov't propaganda or accidental misinformation. DoS doesn't take much bandwidth, it just opens a huge amount of ports on a server. You see, to exchange info, two computers must agree on which port they'll exchange it over. Basically one computer tells another it wants to connect, the other one says ok and gives back the port number to which the first computer attaches. Overall that's some 20-30 bytes in each direction. After that, information exchange between computers can begin, and while it lasts no other computer can connect to that port.
Now, there is a maximum number of 65535 ports available on any server. When you open a port, the server waits until you start sending data (default value is 60 seconds). If no data has been send during that timeout, server concludes that there's been an error and closes the port to make it available to other users. Now, since you can generally open several hundred ports per second, that means it will take you about a couple of minutes to open up all 65535 ports. When that happens the server starts refusing connections because there aren't any ports available to make one, even though it has plenty of bandwith available. Whenever a port closes, you just ask the server to reopen it again. Occasionally, another user will get through if he manages to ask for the port to reopen before you do so it's not a 100% blockade, but more than 99% of users will not be able to connect.
The only downside to this is that the site comes back online about a minute after the attack stops. So the only way to keep it down is to constantly have someone opening up those ports ports. Total bandwith required to do so is just several kb/s. You can basically bring down a big server with a 56k modem that way. |
|
|
| DrUg_Tit0 |
Seems like Iran is no longer of interest since Michael Jackson died, but if anyone wants it, here's an updated version of the DoS program, can attack both [[ LINK REMOVED ]]
. If anyone has the will and the resources, you can keep the program running as an all-nighter, the sites won't be available to anyone as long as the program runs on at least one computer... |
|
|
| DJ Damerchi |
| quote: | Originally posted by DrUg_Tit0
Seems like Iran is no longer of interest since Michael Jackson died |
Clearly, Ahmadinejad offed him. Colorut-u in on this one?
cheers for the file, is it really that simple? |
|
|
| Q5echo |
| quote: | Originally posted by josh4
Unless the Iranian people grow a pair to stand up to (now an even stronger) conservative government I don't see any real reform being made. |
the kind of balls youre so eager to throw around on a rhetorical string are the kind that require a jock strap that you will never comprehend actually putting on. those balls are for killing - they're prepared to be killed as well.
a few more years of the status quo and we may see more of this later but anything less than armed conflict then is relatively pointless. |
|
|
| Krypton |
| quote: | Originally posted by Q5echo
the kind of balls youre so eager to throw around on a rhetorical string are the kind that require a jock strap that you will never comprehend actually putting on. those balls are for killing - they're prepared to be killed as well.
a few more years of the status quo and we may see more of this later but anything less than armed conflict then is relatively pointless. |
Didn't you advocate a "preemptive" strike on Iran. Or at the very least, "regime change"? |
|
|
| Q5echo |
| quote: | Originally posted by Krypton
Didn't you advocate a "preemptive" strike on Iran. |
hell no. search
| quote: | | Or at the very least, "regime change"? |
hell yes. |
|
|
| Lemonad |
| quote: | Originally posted by DrUg_Tit0
Seems like Iran is no longer of interest since Michael Jackson died, but if anyone wants it, here's an updated version of the DoS program, can attack both [[ LINK REMOVED ]]
. If anyone has the will and the resources, you can keep the program running as an all-nighter, the sites won't be available to anyone as long as the program runs on at least one computer... |
I've never done such a thing but wouldn't that easier said than done?
If it was that easy, wouldn't competitors use it against each other to take away revenue? Even if it works, I'm pretty sure they'll work around it. |
|
|
| Krypton |
| quote: | Originally posted by Q5echo
hell yes. |
1953 style? |
|
|
| Q5echo |
| quote: | Originally posted by Krypton
1953 style? |
i don't even know what that means. |
|
|
|
|
