I find it interesting that we have a lot of hand wringing about how the one hour change causes such mass casualties, but nobody is interested in banning employers from scheduling people nearly at random rather than offering a consistent schedule. If getting to work on time induces that much lethal stress, shouldn't we ban sanctions against employees who come in late as long as they average out close to on time?
You need to read the thread again starting from the top. Either you are posting to the wrong thread or you're having a far more in-depth discussion in your own head than is implied by the actual posts here.
All you have said here is that you believe *I* should review the history of BIOS and that you will not defend your position (whatever it may be). Your post above was the first time in this thread you even claimed we have EFI for a reason (but you haven't stated one to me yet).
I agree a BIOS replacement was needed. EFI wasn't it. I have a worn out sock that needs replacing too, but you won't see me hopping down the street with my toes stuck in a bowling ball.
If you think EFI was the right answer, defend your position.
Actually, I know a great deal about it including being one of the first to use boot code tracing on a PC and work on the CoreBoot project (back when it was still LinuxBIOS). My first hack on BIOS itself was to convince an XT clone to accept a V20 CPU.
The biggest problems with BIOS were it's attempt to be an Input Output System as well as a startup firmware and severe limitations on it's ability to handle large drives.
The rest is a solution looking for a problem.
Now, would you like to make a substantial claim against my position rather than a frivolous claim that I don't know the subject matter or were you just blowing smoke?
UEFI is a "solution" looking for a problem. It truly has nothing to offer. We don't need a badly implemented mini-OS to load the real OS.
What we really needed was a simple 64 bit clean minimalist firmware to put the system into a known good standard condition, then load a stub and jump to it.
And here we find the danger of armchair cryptography. It is MUCH easier to crack 4 4 character hashes than it is to crack one 8 character hash. Overlap between the hashes makes it easier still.
And this is now going to come back to bite everyone hard. Since we can't believe the Feds at all, what should have been a simple claim to dismiss is now going to be a boiling controversy.
RAID only helps when one copy is unambiguously lost, such as when a drive fails entirely. If one copy gets a bit flipped, it can't tell which version is correct. You need an FS with it's own error detection to be able to tell which copy is good and re-write the bad copy.
In my tests on a VM, BTRFS RAID 1 worked flawlessly but RAID 5 crashed and burned. The word from the development team suggests that's par for the course.
Worse, even if the RAID controller reads all of the disks all it can say is the data is corrupt. It has no way to know which block is the problem. ZFS and BTRFS both have sufficient checksumming in redundant modes to detect which copy is bad and repair it.
Of course rent tends to be outrageous and forever rising. A one time cost of $1000/employee for an excellent chair is tiny in comparison exen if you treat it as a signing bonus.
Funny thing, they're putting in robots even in places that did not change the minimum wage. Almost as if the decision has nothing to do with increasing the minimum wage.
We've seen this movie hundreds of times, and we still forget the ending.
Others seem to keep forgetting that point in the middle of the movie where things get really bad for the masses until something is done to improve their lot before it boils over into a revolution (or sometimes nothing is done and heads roll).
Perhaps if we could be a bit proactive this time (since we HAVE seen this movie before) we could avoid all of that and get on with the happy ending.
Yes, really. The corded phone doesn't have to emit microwaves strong enough to reach the nearest tower. The wired headset will conduct at least some of the microwave radiation directly to your ear.
Simple enough, adopt a same origin policy. Your phone provider(s) can allow you to spoof any number that is assigned to you as long as it comes from a line that is assigned to you. If you want/need a 3rd party to spoof a number assigned to you, just sign a document in blood (figuratively) that lines belonging to 3rd party represent you for the next x days.
Once here in the Deep South, I encountered a tourist from Germany who spoke no English. He spoke German slowly and loudly when I didn't appear to understand. Slowly and distinctly enough that I with my 1 year of German years before was able to get the gist of his question and direct him to the park he was looking for.
My Mom uses Linux regularly. She is certainly not a programmer or even a "power user". She browses the web and emails. Occasional light word processing. Nothing hard about any of that. My experience as the "computer guy" is that Windows users don't know how to change their screen resolution either, even though it is nearly as simple as doing it in Linux.
It doesn't. This is nothing more than the latest from MS's department of dirty tricks. And old OS may not take advantage of new capabilities, but it should run just fine.
Warnings are nice, but it's hard to anticipate all of the conditions where a warning might be in order. It's also hard to make people pay attention to warnings when each and every action produces one or more warnings.
Reversibility is a key. Let the admin see the consequences of the last given command and undo it if necessary. Warnings are for actions that are intrinsically irreversible. Build it into the commands if possible. If not, build it into the procedures. Don't delete an instance, just take it offline for a while first and see if anyone squawks. Don't even allow a delete of an instance that isn't offline already, preferably not until it has been offline for some time.
The human should be responsible for the consequences of the autopilot refusing to continue driving, but the manufacturer should be responsible if the autopilot DOESN'T decide to stop and it then crashes.
Slashdot Mirror
Because some ransomware has been cracked so that you can recover the data without paying. They might want to discourage further attempts.
I find it interesting that we have a lot of hand wringing about how the one hour change causes such mass casualties, but nobody is interested in banning employers from scheduling people nearly at random rather than offering a consistent schedule. If getting to work on time induces that much lethal stress, shouldn't we ban sanctions against employees who come in late as long as they average out close to on time?
You need to read the thread again starting from the top. Either you are posting to the wrong thread or you're having a far more in-depth discussion in your own head than is implied by the actual posts here.
All you have said here is that you believe *I* should review the history of BIOS and that you will not defend your position (whatever it may be). Your post above was the first time in this thread you even claimed we have EFI for a reason (but you haven't stated one to me yet).
In other words, you haven't a clue?
I agree a BIOS replacement was needed. EFI wasn't it. I have a worn out sock that needs replacing too, but you won't see me hopping down the street with my toes stuck in a bowling ball.
If you think EFI was the right answer, defend your position.
Actually, I know a great deal about it including being one of the first to use boot code tracing on a PC and work on the CoreBoot project (back when it was still LinuxBIOS). My first hack on BIOS itself was to convince an XT clone to accept a V20 CPU.
The biggest problems with BIOS were it's attempt to be an Input Output System as well as a startup firmware and severe limitations on it's ability to handle large drives.
The rest is a solution looking for a problem.
Now, would you like to make a substantial claim against my position rather than a frivolous claim that I don't know the subject matter or were you just blowing smoke?
Hear! Hear!
UEFI is a "solution" looking for a problem. It truly has nothing to offer. We don't need a badly implemented mini-OS to load the real OS.
What we really needed was a simple 64 bit clean minimalist firmware to put the system into a known good standard condition, then load a stub and jump to it.
And here we find the danger of armchair cryptography. It is MUCH easier to crack 4 4 character hashes than it is to crack one 8 character hash. Overlap between the hashes makes it easier still.
And this is now going to come back to bite everyone hard. Since we can't believe the Feds at all, what should have been a simple claim to dismiss is now going to be a boiling controversy.
RAID only helps when one copy is unambiguously lost, such as when a drive fails entirely. If one copy gets a bit flipped, it can't tell which version is correct. You need an FS with it's own error detection to be able to tell which copy is good and re-write the bad copy.
In my tests on a VM, BTRFS RAID 1 worked flawlessly but RAID 5 crashed and burned. The word from the development team suggests that's par for the course.
Worse, even if the RAID controller reads all of the disks all it can say is the data is corrupt. It has no way to know which block is the problem. ZFS and BTRFS both have sufficient checksumming in redundant modes to detect which copy is bad and repair it.
Of course rent tends to be outrageous and forever rising. A one time cost of $1000/employee for an excellent chair is tiny in comparison exen if you treat it as a signing bonus.
Funny thing, they're putting in robots even in places that did not change the minimum wage. Almost as if the decision has nothing to do with increasing the minimum wage.
We've seen this movie hundreds of times, and we still forget the ending.
Others seem to keep forgetting that point in the middle of the movie where things get really bad for the masses until something is done to improve their lot before it boils over into a revolution (or sometimes nothing is done and heads roll).
Perhaps if we could be a bit proactive this time (since we HAVE seen this movie before) we could avoid all of that and get on with the happy ending.
It does. It may not be some specific frequency that targets water, but it does heat water. That's why you can boil water in a microwave.
The 60 Hz emissions from a hair dryer or blender are quite different than microwave emissions.
Yes, really. The corded phone doesn't have to emit microwaves strong enough to reach the nearest tower. The wired headset will conduct at least some of the microwave radiation directly to your ear.
The question of harm is a different matter.
The second case should not be permitted. If you want to call me, you'd better be willing to answer when I call you. Otherwise, go away.
So allow same origin spoofing. Any line the local pizza place or doctor's office owns can advertise any number assigned to them but no others.
Apply the rules at the border should a call be handed off for completion.
Simple enough, adopt a same origin policy. Your phone provider(s) can allow you to spoof any number that is assigned to you as long as it comes from a line that is assigned to you. If you want/need a 3rd party to spoof a number assigned to you, just sign a document in blood (figuratively) that lines belonging to 3rd party represent you for the next x days.
Once here in the Deep South, I encountered a tourist from Germany who spoke no English. He spoke German slowly and loudly when I didn't appear to understand. Slowly and distinctly enough that I with my 1 year of German years before was able to get the gist of his question and direct him to the park he was looking for.
My Mom uses Linux regularly. She is certainly not a programmer or even a "power user". She browses the web and emails. Occasional light word processing. Nothing hard about any of that. My experience as the "computer guy" is that Windows users don't know how to change their screen resolution either, even though it is nearly as simple as doing it in Linux.
It doesn't. This is nothing more than the latest from MS's department of dirty tricks. And old OS may not take advantage of new capabilities, but it should run just fine.
Warnings are nice, but it's hard to anticipate all of the conditions where a warning might be in order. It's also hard to make people pay attention to warnings when each and every action produces one or more warnings.
Reversibility is a key. Let the admin see the consequences of the last given command and undo it if necessary. Warnings are for actions that are intrinsically irreversible. Build it into the commands if possible. If not, build it into the procedures. Don't delete an instance, just take it offline for a while first and see if anyone squawks. Don't even allow a delete of an instance that isn't offline already, preferably not until it has been offline for some time.
The human should be responsible for the consequences of the autopilot refusing to continue driving, but the manufacturer should be responsible if the autopilot DOESN'T decide to stop and it then crashes.