Slashdot Mirror

Get whoever makes something like this: hd radio to make a bunch of them. If you believe the reviews, one set of batteries goes a long way.

Basically we need to stop relying on FM radio. It is obsolete, and those frequencies are going to go all digital sooner or later, hopefully. Television for most probably isn't feasible. They have better things to do than provide power to a bunch of tvs, and gas for generators is apparently very scarce. Even portable ones would require at least a moderately sized solar panel, and that would be better used to charge a phone.

Twitter shouldn't exist as a company. The technology was an accident, the founders played musical chairs for the CEO position, and a business model to generate revenues came years after blowing through venture capital funding. Read all about it in, "Hatching Twitter: A True Story of Money, Power, Friendship, and Betrayal" by Nick Bilton.

Why not just buy like a transistor radio with solar cell charging, their very cheep. Where's my Swiss knife pop out of my Iphone, that would be more useful.

Or get a hand cranked radio/flashlight/iPhone charger for emergencies.

Read the book: "The IKEA Edge: Building Global Growth and Social Good at the World's Most Iconic Home Store".

When you update to System76, make sure you get a Union 76 antenna topper for the wifi.

It already exists (well, not the furby specifically): https://www.amazon.com/CogniTo...

Andrew Tanenbaum - the author of Minix

The author of Minix who lost out to the author of Linux. Sad.

And when Facebook does it, it's to make money advertising.

I still have the book Software Engineering by Shooman.

If I paid $100 for a textbook, I would keep it too.

The only thing missing is the CEO calling someone on an asshole in a conference call (see "Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room").

Holy fuck. The idiocy that we see here at /. these days is astounding! Have you ever actually used any sort of a cloud provider?

ISOs are a relic of the 1990s. The recommended best practice today is to upload a preconfigured VM image.

Here are some instructions for doing it using Microsoft's Azure platform.

And here is some information about doing it using Amazon's AWS platform.

The advantages of this approach should be obvious. But since you seem oblivious, let's look at some of them. First of all, you're not stuck using an ISO image as the installation medium. Many Linux distros and even other OSes offer network-aware installations that bring in only the software you actually need. So you can build your VM using only the software you want, and then upload it to your cloud provider. There are other benefits, like being able to configure the VM locally, rather than remotely. You inherently get a local initial backup. It's often quicker to upload a small 100 MB compressed VM image than it is to upload a 800 MB or even 4 GB ISO image.

And a local console is irrelevant in the world of virtual machines and virtual storage. If you have a problem with a VM, you can disconnect its virtual disk, attach the virtual disk to another working VM, apply whatever fixes are necessary, and then reattach the virtual disk to the initial VM. In the extraordinarily rare case that there's a problem with the VM, then you just spin up a new one and destroy the old one, after detaching any attached virtual disks to preserve the data.

You're literally stuck in the 1990s, from what I can see. The world has moved on long ago, but you're still dicking around with primitive approaches. The problems you're facing don't even exist for the rest of us because we moved past them over a decade ago!

Facebook was always a dodgy company since it was founded at Harvard. Just watch "The Social Network" or read "The Accidental Billionaires: The Founding of Facebook: A Tale of Sex, Money, Genius and Betrayal" that the movie is based on.

Facebook was always a dodgy company since it was founded at Harvard. Just watch "The Social Network" or read "The Accidental Billionaires: The Founding of Facebook: A Tale of Sex, Money, Genius and Betrayal" that the movie is based on.

Have some Bitter Lemon with your whine, loser.

If you can afford to spend $500 on a Dyson vacuum cleaner, I got some prime beach front property in Florida you can buy.

Twitter shouldn't exist as a company. The technology was an accident, the founders played musical chairs for the CEO position, and a business model to generate revenues came years after blowing through venture capital funding. Read all about it in, "Hatching Twitter: A True Story of Money, Power, Friendship, and Betrayal" by Nick Bilton.

I've heard that the Core i9-7980XE were re-badge Kaby Lake processors because Intel had no product to compete with AMD.

If you think that Arthur Anderson can't happen again, read about it in "The Smartest Guys in the Room: The Amazing Rise and Scandalous Fall of Enron".

Is to get a battery case to provide extra juice for your you iPhone.

Which of the 5 mentioned in the report was that? And do you really think a 2.25kg drone will do any less damage when 2.25kg ducks, which are much softer, have been known to take down planes?

Was your point really "well, it hasn't happened in Austrailia, so it must not be a big deal"? And 5lb is still quite small for a drone capable of stable flight at altitudes over 100 feet or so; 20lb (that is, ~10kg) drones fare much better than their lighter "toy" counterparts at higher altitudes where there are likely to be stronger winds. You'd me amazed what a difference 10 feet or 1lb can make in a craft's ability to maintain stable flight.

Or are you trying to say a 10kg drone won't do the same damage as a 10kg model plane? I mean, it's either that or a 2.5kg drone will do less damage than a 2.5kg duck; and I'm pretty sure both hypothesis are wrong.

Or do you think all drones weigh under 1lb like the shit they sell at Brookstone or your local drug store? Buddy, there are some absolutely massive hobbyist drones out there. This one is almost 23kg, and it took me 30 seconds to find it on Google. Something like that could fly at or above 400ft with ease and pose a very real threat to manned aircraft; something like this, not so much on either front.

A new book by The MIT Press looks interesting: "For Fun and Profit: A History of the Free and Open Source Software Revolution".

Bet you won't find this one in many libraries.

There's a very interesting chapter about Richard Stallman in "Hackers: Heroes of the Computer Revolution".

A best seller by Hillary Clinton that has yet to be banned. Get yours while they're still available!

It's the ignored books.

As mentioned previously, I work for AWS, but I'm speaking personally here.

I'm not sure where this idea of "run them for less than fifteen minutes each, terminate them after the jobs run, and not have to pay for CPU time" has come from; this is the first I've heard of it. To my knowledge, this has never been the case. Currently usage from 0-59.999... minutes is billed as 1 instance-hour; 60.0-119.999... as 2 instance-hours; etc. Starting October 2, you will be billed by the second (with a 1 minute minimum). This should be a cost savings for everyone who's currently running on-demand instances.

There is a free tier for new accounts, in which you get 750 instance-hours of t2.micro usage (on Amazon Linux, RHEL, SLES, or Windows) free. However, if you run for 14 minutes (say), that still counts today as 1 instance-hour; there's no magic 15 minute cutoff.

Disclaimer: I work for AWS, but I'm speaking personally here.

This will always be cheaper for on-demand users. Previously, you were charged a full hour for any fractional usage. As soon as you start an instance, you're being billed -- even a start and stop a second later counted as 1 hour. (There is a free tier: you get 750 hours/month of t2.micro usage on Linux, RHEL, SLES, or Windows, during the first 12 months.)

Let's say you had a batch job that ran for 12 minutes, 4x/day, on Amazon Linux on a c4.large instance in the Oregon region ($0.100/instance-hour). Before this change, you would have paid $12.20/month (4 instance-hours/day x 30.5 days/month x $0.100/instance-hour). Starting October 2, you will pay $2.44/month (0.8 instance-hours/day x 30.5 days/month x $0.100/instance-hour).

AWS believes that cloud computing is going to be a high volume, relatively low margin business, and Amazon is very comfortable with these types of businesses. AWS has had (as of this writing) 62 price reductions in the last 9 years, largely in the absence of any competitive pressure. (And, since I pay for my personal usage -- no, we don't get a free lunch here! -- that's kept me happy as a customer.) Internally, it's a relentlessly customer-obsessed culture -- you can (and I have!) stopped a VP mid-speech by saying, "Wait, I don't think that's the right thing for the customer!" (We're also a very data-driven culture, so you're expected to have data to support this, of course. :-) )

Hope this helps clear up some of the confusion. Note that there are some cases where billing will continue to be per-hour (or fraction thereof), such as marketplace usage -- Jeff Barr's blog post has all the details.

Disclaimer: I work for AWS, but I'm speaking personally here.

This will always be cheaper for on-demand users. Previously, you were charged a full hour for any fractional usage. As soon as you start an instance, you're being billed -- even a start and stop a second later counted as 1 hour. (There is a free tier: you get 750 hours/month of t2.micro usage on Linux, RHEL, SLES, or Windows, during the first 12 months.)

Let's say you had a batch job that ran for 12 minutes, 4x/day, on Amazon Linux on a c4.large instance in the Oregon region ($0.100/instance-hour). Before this change, you would have paid $12.20/month (4 instance-hours/day x 30.5 days/month x $0.100/instance-hour). Starting October 2, you will pay $2.44/month (0.8 instance-hours/day x 30.5 days/month x $0.100/instance-hour).

AWS believes that cloud computing is going to be a high volume, relatively low margin business, and Amazon is very comfortable with these types of businesses. AWS has had (as of this writing) 62 price reductions in the last 9 years, largely in the absence of any competitive pressure. (And, since I pay for my personal usage -- no, we don't get a free lunch here! -- that's kept me happy as a customer.) Internally, it's a relentlessly customer-obsessed culture -- you can (and I have!) stopped a VP mid-speech by saying, "Wait, I don't think that's the right thing for the customer!" (We're also a very data-driven culture, so you're expected to have data to support this, of course. :-) )

Hope this helps clear up some of the confusion. Note that there are some cases where billing will continue to be per-hour (or fraction thereof), such as marketplace usage -- Jeff Barr's blog post has all the details.

You haven't played Tetris until you played Tetris in 3D blocks.

https://xkcd.com/505/

Conway's Game of Life is indeed Turing Complete (see also: A New Kind of Science) and this is indeed pretty awesome that they were able to do this...

Someone obviously haven't read "PGP & GPG: Email for the Practical Paranoid" by Michael W Lucas.

Replying to myself, it does look like these contraptions exist. https://www.amazon.com/iSpring...

You joke, but there are people on Amazon doing exactly that.

Better order your tinfoil hat before it's too late.

Might be easier to read the book, "The Ultimate History of Video Games: from Pong to Pokemon and beyond...".

You can still get "The Anarchist Cookbook" on Amazon, which is the number one bestseller in Anarchism.

Sorry but as you should know God is an Englishman and what you suggest simply isn't cricket.

Get a Tesla mouse pad. No AI included.

Until you see the movie with Clint Eastwood. A classic Cold War masterpiece.

Read the book, "The Accidental Billionaires: The Founding of Facebook: A Tale of Sex, Money, Genius and Betrayal", and find out otherwise.

Remember the people who built the Internet in "Where Wizards Stay Up Late: The Origins Of The Internet".

nehumanuscrede posited:

They like to use cost as an excuse for poor security. Cheapest hardware, outsourced IT personnel, and always slashing of the IT budgets. Security isn't an investment in their eyes, it's an expense. Is why they all like " The Cloud " because it offloads that responsibility onto anothers shoulders.

Not enough forward thinking to understand what happens to their stock price and / or litigation flooding when a serious breach goes public due to their negligence disguised as " cost savings ".

Start jailing the executives of these companies and they'll start taking things more seriously.

Your analysis of the roots of executive negligence is, IMnsHO, spot on - although I would have substituted the acronym "MBAs" for "accountants" in the title of my response. After all, it's rare that a mere accountant rises to the executive suite of any significant-size corporation. MBAs, OTOH, absolutely dominate the top ranks of major corporations across the Western world. It is they, and not the accountants who work for them, who prioritize spending and set corporate policy. Accountants, by contrast, are mere hewers of wood and carriers of water, metaphorically speaking.

The problem lies in your proposed solution: to jail the executives responsible for making security a second- or third-tier priority, rather than a primary concern. You know - the kind of thing on which CEOs decide to spend actual money and devote real effort. There are two principal reasons why MBAs disregard its importance:

• a. MBA programs throughout the world pound into their students' heads that increasing short-term shareholder return should not be their first priority - it should and must be their ONLY one; and
• b. current corporate law - at least in the United States - is designed to shield boards of directors and the executives who work for them from personal legal responsibility for their decisions (and thus from their consequences).

For a lot of this, you can blame SCOTUS's decisions over the course of the past century or so. Especially in times when the court has been dominated by Republican jurists, the Supremes have steadily expanded the "rights" of fictitious persons (i.e. - corporations), and diminished the legal accountability of those who run them. The entirely-predictable result has been exactly the corporate governance trends we've increasingly experienced, especially since the dawn of the Rehnquist court and its philosophical heir, the Roberts version: a precipitous fall in legal corporate executive accountability, and a corresponding rise in corporate fecklessness and misgovernance.

Nor does it help that MBA programs actively foster careerism in their students - the conviction that loyalty to their current employer is foolish, that the boards of directors who will hire and reward them have no sense of history, and that, so long as they increase quarter-over-quarter returns for shareholders, the damage they do in the process to the long-term viability of the companies they will lead is and should be of no personal concern to them, because, within five years, they'll have moved on to work (for a larger salary and better perquisites) for some other corporate entity, altogether. And the mess they leave behind them will have become somebody else's problem.

Or opportunity, as the case may be.

So:

• 1 - Focus on short-term shareholder return.
• 2 - Ignore security (because see #1).
• 3 - Profit!

(Posting as AC only to avoid undoing up-mods - including for parent.)

--

Check out my novel.

It's pretty safe to say that a lot of gamers who want solid performance in shitty games like PUBG, will most likely flock to the i7-8700k, which promises the single core performance of an i7-7700k with 50% more cores.

Isn't the i7-8700K a rebadged Kaby Lake processor that Intel rushed out to the market to appear to be competitive with AMD?

The Nvidia Shield is still $199.

Maybe creimer wrote the enterprise-level IT department standards that allowed it. This is what happens when your ditch digging infosec miracle workers are pulling triple duty as IT, Custodial, and Security staff!

Would you like some spam musubi to go with your whine?

Get a Tesla mouse pad to match your new AMD CPU. No AI included.

Make sure you have a fire-proof and explosion-proof bag for your batteries.

Click on this link:

https://www.amazon.com/What-Ha...

Read the reviews. Another poster above quoted some of them, verbatim, for every situation imaginable. If you'd expanded the thread and highlighted just one of those quotes and searched, you'd have been able to verify they're telling the truth.

Yeah, it required some effort - highlighting their quote and clicking search. That's exactly how I found it. Note the very first review:

https://www.amazon.com/gp/cust...

That's a verified purchase. As it's a Kindle edition, you can even find reviews from verified purchasers of the hardcover edition. If you say it's a timing issue, that they couldn't have read the book in that amount of time, you can find positive reviews left in the same time period that were left up and not deleted.

It's bullshit and dishonest. You can at least try to be honest with me. You didn't even try to search for it. You can expand the thread (the top post in this thread) and read this, and the citations - and those are only a few examples. So, you either didn't search or didn't expand the thread, or maybe both? It literally only requires highlighting the text and clicking search. You can just go right to the site and see the myriad bits of proof that are offered. You didn't even have to search. They are (were?) deleting reviews from verified purchasers.

I suppose you could believe it's all just a giant conspiracy and all these disparate users have come together to make the same claims. I believe some of them even have screenshots, though I suppose you may wish to believe they fabricated those. It's up to you, I guess. But, yeah, it's not really hard to discover.

As the other poster put it, you can believe the reports or you can believe your own lying eyes. (That was sarcasm on their part - meaning, yeah, you can actually go to the site and see all the evidence. No journalists required.)

Click on this link:

https://www.amazon.com/What-Ha...

Read the reviews. Another poster above quoted some of them, verbatim, for every situation imaginable. If you'd expanded the thread and highlighted just one of those quotes and searched, you'd have been able to verify they're telling the truth.

Yeah, it required some effort - highlighting their quote and clicking search. That's exactly how I found it. Note the very first review:

https://www.amazon.com/gp/cust...

That's a verified purchase. As it's a Kindle edition, you can even find reviews from verified purchasers of the hardcover edition. If you say it's a timing issue, that they couldn't have read the book in that amount of time, you can find positive reviews left in the same time period that were left up and not deleted.

It's bullshit and dishonest. You can at least try to be honest with me. You didn't even try to search for it. You can expand the thread (the top post in this thread) and read this, and the citations - and those are only a few examples. So, you either didn't search or didn't expand the thread, or maybe both? It literally only requires highlighting the text and clicking search. You can just go right to the site and see the myriad bits of proof that are offered. You didn't even have to search. They are (were?) deleting reviews from verified purchasers.

I suppose you could believe it's all just a giant conspiracy and all these disparate users have come together to make the same claims. I believe some of them even have screenshots, though I suppose you may wish to believe they fabricated those. It's up to you, I guess. But, yeah, it's not really hard to discover.

As the other poster put it, you can believe the reports or you can believe your own lying eyes. (That was sarcasm on their part - meaning, yeah, you can actually go to the site and see all the evidence. No journalists required.)

(Nissan charged me $1500 for a truck wiring harness after mice chewed the insulation. It's really hard to believe that almost 6% of the cost of that truck was in the wiring harness.)

It certainly is not, although Automakers do tend to use high-quality connectors which are actually expensive in and of themselves. However, they are expensive to produce — even a simple harness without any connectors retails for hundreds of dollars. Granted, that includes a fuse panel, but it's not much of a fuse panel. My complete engine underhood harness includes a small fuse panel with a relay on it, neither you nor I wants to know what Audi would want for a complete one new but used they run around $400.