You're right. If you're just using it to touch up config files, then vim isn't for you.
However, if that's all you think vim is good for, then you don't grok vim. Vim is a fully featured IDE that's coded for terseness. It's made to get things done in the quickest way possible - where "quickest" is mostly defined by the fewest keystrokes. Every key on your keyboard is a hotkey, and every key does something different. Chances are you wont be changing every character to the end of your current line very often, but for that time you need to, there's the command in vim "C". Just a capital c. No highlighting the line, cutting it so you can save it in case you need it back with ctrl+x, etc. Just C.
Make sure it's a capital c though, because just "c" will do something entirely different. With vim it's waste not, want not. You don't waste any key on the keyboard. It makes for, once you get past the rough learning curve, an editor that runs with the best (and then some - I would argue that emacs is the only editor that puts up a fight against vim, but that's an argument for another day). I challenge you to find something that a modern day IDE can do that vim can't.
I do a global block of ad-servers via self-inflicted DNS poisoning. Essentially I use dnsmasq to redirect all ad-server requests to 127.0.0.1, then default all other dns requests to google's dns servers. You can find the ad server lists here.
Not necessarily. If they're overclocking a single core, while underclocking the rest, it may all balance out to have an average core speed that's less than what it was. However, in doing this it may actually increase performance if there is a single app that requires a lot of CPU time (and isn't threaded). In reality the total speed of the computer is being reduced, while the performance as viewed by the user is increasing.
For a second I thought that this was hyperbole, but then I realized it's actually true. Seeing as the original starcraft was released in 1998, it'd make the parent 24 years old.
God that's scary.
Things like this make me sad. Not just because I feel bad for the person, but also because frankly I don't want my taxes spent on keeping this man imprisoned for up to twenty years. Cost of imprisonment is on average 22,650 per year, at 20 years that's $453,000. In my opinion it's not worth that much to keep a man behind bars for guessing a password.
Sadly, nowadays this is a myth. Current MLC and SLC SSD's have (on average) 10,000 and 100,000 writes (respectively) before any bitwear will occur. While this number is small, remember that all modern mainstream SSD's have wear leveling algorithms built into the controller. Intel rates their drives' minimum useful life at 5 years [pdf link - page 10], with an estimated life of 20 years. Note that this number is based on 20GB of writes per day, every day. SSD's nowadays will have no problems with acting as a cache for the system.
DES and MD5 are the two most commonly used password encryption methods for linux systems. MD5 is the more secure of the two. Granted, there are stronger encryption methods than MD5, however I'm using it as an example because it is the most prevalent in modern day linux architectures.
In regards to your rainbow tables comment, please see my previous comment regarding why rainbow tables would be impossible in this case.
it would be a matter of a simple lookup since all the "grunt" work has been done already.
Not quite. There are no tables that exist, nor can they exist, that have 16 character passwords with the given qualifications. Assuming you could generate the tables, which as my comment above shows as being not possible, let's find out just how much space that table would require to store.
MD5 hashes are 128 bits. The corresponding password, assuming 8 bits per character, is also 16*8=128bits. Assuming no overhead, that means we have 256 bits, or 32 bytes per password. Using the calculation in my previous post, 16 character passwords with those qualifications have 1.24*10^30 combinations. That means 3.96*10^31 bytes would be required to store this. How much is that? Let's put it this way - SI prefixes don't go up that high. Why? Because it's such an astronomically large number that there is no reason (yet) to have naming conventions that high. The entire internet is estimated to have 5*10^20 bytes. The amount of hard drive storage in every computer ever made by man combined doesn't have the necessary storage to hold that rainbow table.
Since we're pretending, let's pretend your imaginary computer cluster actually exists. Now let's find us the speed that said computer would have to run at to crack that password in 2 months.
A 16 character password with symbols (12), numbers (10), lowercase letters (26) and uppercase letters (26) would have 76^16 combinations. This is approximately 1.24 * 10^30th.
An MD5 hash takes 256 clock cycles in the best-case scenario (search for 256), assuming no overhead. That means that we have 3.17*10^32 number of clock cycles that must be ran through in order to compute/crack every possible password in that range.
Two months is approximately (365.242199 days/year)(2/12)(24hours/day)(3600seconds/hour) = 5259488 = 5.26*10^6 seconds.
In that time, a "computer or cluster" would have to run at (3.17*10^32 cycles)/(5.26*10^6 seconds) = 6.03 * 10^25 Hz. That's 6.03 * 10^16 GHz, or 60.3 yottahertz.
Currently, the world's fastest supercomputer is the Cray Jaguar. It has 224256 opteron cores clocked at 3.2Ghz. That means it's total processing speed (again, assuming no overhead here) is 7.18*10^14 Hz. Your pretend "computer or cluster" is 84027852100 times as fast as the worlds fastest supercomputer. 84 billion times as fast.
Using the same architecture as the Cray Jaguar, the world GDP couldn't afford to buy that computer. The world's power grids couldn't power it. This is/., know the math behind your arguments before you post.
...but to be honest it really doesn't limit the options of available targets. If we want to nuke someone, you'd best be sure we'll find a way to show that they're in "non-compliance".
Remember that facebook is now the #1 site when it comes to traffic. You aren't going to get it's 500 million or so users to migrate to a self configurable system simply in the name of privacy. What percentage of the users on facebook actually care? On quarter of one percent? Even that would be a stretch. People aren't going to leave their hard earned farmville accounts because facebook is using their personal data to market to them. It's not a concern in this day and age.
This is definitely a sad outcome to all of this. However, couldn't Netflix just update their EULA and/or have an opt-in for users who want to make the experience better?
I have mixed feelings on this. While it's true that he does appear to be fairly biased against the FSF's philosophy, at the same time he also has good diplomatic relations with Microsoft (this could be a good thing). The reason why this could be a good thing is that hopefully (and this is a big hopefully) it will allow w3c to influence Microsoft more when it comes to adhering to web standards in IE.
Obviously this can go the other way as well, with IE imposing its standards onto w3c, and forcing the spec itself to change/adapt. Pray to RMS that it goes the way of the former.
Slashdot Mirror
You're right. If you're just using it to touch up config files, then vim isn't for you.
However, if that's all you think vim is good for, then you don't grok vim. Vim is a fully featured IDE that's coded for terseness. It's made to get things done in the quickest way possible - where "quickest" is mostly defined by the fewest keystrokes. Every key on your keyboard is a hotkey, and every key does something different. Chances are you wont be changing every character to the end of your current line very often, but for that time you need to, there's the command in vim "C". Just a capital c. No highlighting the line, cutting it so you can save it in case you need it back with ctrl+x, etc. Just C.
Make sure it's a capital c though, because just "c" will do something entirely different. With vim it's waste not, want not. You don't waste any key on the keyboard. It makes for, once you get past the rough learning curve, an editor that runs with the best (and then some - I would argue that emacs is the only editor that puts up a fight against vim, but that's an argument for another day). I challenge you to find something that a modern day IDE can do that vim can't.
...yes?
I do a global block of ad-servers via self-inflicted DNS poisoning. Essentially I use dnsmasq to redirect all ad-server requests to 127.0.0.1, then default all other dns requests to google's dns servers. You can find the ad server lists here.
Not necessarily. If they're overclocking a single core, while underclocking the rest, it may all balance out to have an average core speed that's less than what it was. However, in doing this it may actually increase performance if there is a single app that requires a lot of CPU time (and isn't threaded). In reality the total speed of the computer is being reduced, while the performance as viewed by the user is increasing.
For a second I thought that this was hyperbole, but then I realized it's actually true. Seeing as the original starcraft was released in 1998, it'd make the parent 24 years old.
God that's scary.
in power plants in South Korea. I hear they're going to have a boom come July.
Things like this make me sad. Not just because I feel bad for the person, but also because frankly I don't want my taxes spent on keeping this man imprisoned for up to twenty years. Cost of imprisonment is on average 22,650 per year, at 20 years that's $453,000. In my opinion it's not worth that much to keep a man behind bars for guessing a password.
Sadly, nowadays this is a myth. Current MLC and SLC SSD's have (on average) 10,000 and 100,000 writes (respectively) before any bitwear will occur. While this number is small, remember that all modern mainstream SSD's have wear leveling algorithms built into the controller. Intel rates their drives' minimum useful life at 5 years [pdf link - page 10], with an estimated life of 20 years. Note that this number is based on 20GB of writes per day, every day. SSD's nowadays will have no problems with acting as a cache for the system.
I don't think you entirely understood what he was saying...
Another vote for Redmine. Great product, only takes a second to get running if you're familiar with rails applications.
At 8nm NAND will be lucky to function properly. MLC will be impossible.
Can I ask why? I'm not debating it, i'm just curious.
What a creative password.
DES and MD5 are the two most commonly used password encryption methods for linux systems. MD5 is the more secure of the two. Granted, there are stronger encryption methods than MD5, however I'm using it as an example because it is the most prevalent in modern day linux architectures.
In regards to your rainbow tables comment, please see my previous comment regarding why rainbow tables would be impossible in this case.
Gah, good catch. Funny how although I'm fine with combinatorics, counting and simple addition escape me. Thanks mate.
it would be a matter of a simple lookup since all the "grunt" work has been done already.
Not quite. There are no tables that exist, nor can they exist, that have 16 character passwords with the given qualifications. Assuming you could generate the tables, which as my comment above shows as being not possible, let's find out just how much space that table would require to store.
MD5 hashes are 128 bits. The corresponding password, assuming 8 bits per character, is also 16*8=128bits. Assuming no overhead, that means we have 256 bits, or 32 bytes per password. Using the calculation in my previous post, 16 character passwords with those qualifications have 1.24*10^30 combinations. That means 3.96*10^31 bytes would be required to store this. How much is that? Let's put it this way - SI prefixes don't go up that high. Why? Because it's such an astronomically large number that there is no reason (yet) to have naming conventions that high. The entire internet is estimated to have 5*10^20 bytes. The amount of hard drive storage in every computer ever made by man combined doesn't have the necessary storage to hold that rainbow table.
Since we're pretending, let's pretend your imaginary computer cluster actually exists. Now let's find us the speed that said computer would have to run at to crack that password in 2 months. /., know the math behind your arguments before you post.
A 16 character password with symbols (12), numbers (10), lowercase letters (26) and uppercase letters (26) would have 76^16 combinations. This is approximately 1.24 * 10^30th.
An MD5 hash takes 256 clock cycles in the best-case scenario (search for 256), assuming no overhead. That means that we have 3.17*10^32 number of clock cycles that must be ran through in order to compute/crack every possible password in that range.
Two months is approximately (365.242199 days/year)(2/12)(24hours/day)(3600seconds/hour) = 5259488 = 5.26*10^6 seconds.
In that time, a "computer or cluster" would have to run at (3.17*10^32 cycles)/(5.26*10^6 seconds) = 6.03 * 10^25 Hz. That's 6.03 * 10^16 GHz, or 60.3 yottahertz.
Currently, the world's fastest supercomputer is the Cray Jaguar. It has 224256 opteron cores clocked at 3.2Ghz. That means it's total processing speed (again, assuming no overhead here) is 7.18*10^14 Hz. Your pretend "computer or cluster" is 84027852100 times as fast as the worlds fastest supercomputer. 84 billion times as fast.
Using the same architecture as the Cray Jaguar, the world GDP couldn't afford to buy that computer. The world's power grids couldn't power it. This is
I would pay cash to be able to play this.
...but to be honest it really doesn't limit the options of available targets. If we want to nuke someone, you'd best be sure we'll find a way to show that they're in "non-compliance".
Actually I think that the first step would be induced tetrachromacy. I'd opt in for it in a heartbeat.
Thanks for the update. I was looking for a source when I was writing the parent post, and couldn't find a legitimate one. I now see why.
Remember that facebook is now the #1 site when it comes to traffic. You aren't going to get it's 500 million or so users to migrate to a self configurable system simply in the name of privacy. What percentage of the users on facebook actually care? On quarter of one percent? Even that would be a stretch. People aren't going to leave their hard earned farmville accounts because facebook is using their personal data to market to them. It's not a concern in this day and age.
This is definitely a sad outcome to all of this. However, couldn't Netflix just update their EULA and/or have an opt-in for users who want to make the experience better?
That's actually what the story's headline was. I'll still give you credit for wit though seeing as no one on /. rtfa.
If I want top ten lists, I'll look at digg.
I have mixed feelings on this. While it's true that he does appear to be fairly biased against the FSF's philosophy, at the same time he also has good diplomatic relations with Microsoft (this could be a good thing). The reason why this could be a good thing is that hopefully (and this is a big hopefully) it will allow w3c to influence Microsoft more when it comes to adhering to web standards in IE.
Obviously this can go the other way as well, with IE imposing its standards onto w3c, and forcing the spec itself to change/adapt. Pray to RMS that it goes the way of the former.