From whom? I was told many years ago by a retired agent who gave a talk at my high school's career day that their unofficial policy was to not hire anyone *under* the age of 30, because they wanted you to have several years of practical experience in some related field before they would consider you for a position.
There are tons of professions where knowing how to write good code will help you achieve success over the competition. Computer programmer isn't one of them.
This! Don't give super-mutant birds a chance to be born. Use the solar array against the NCR instead! Residents of the Mojave wasteland will thank you.
...should be the ultimate goal. Understand the design, get it under basic control and then work with a team (largest you can muster) of diligent specialists to design replacement systems that are firewalled off from the original. The reasons for this are twofold:
1) No matter how well documented, well designed, etc. the system is, your knowledge of it will never be perfectly complete and you'll never be able to turn around changes with the same degree of confidence and alacrity as the original admin.
2) Your Career -- If you bend over backwards to make the system work perfectly the original designer will still get most of the credit. If you try your best but the system falls short of expectations, you will take the blame as the new "owner" of the system. It's a lose-lose proposition. Building something new, something that you can demonstrate is supported by more than just one person (unlike the original) will be a feather in your cap.
Killing the city of Jericho, Sodom and Gomorra because they don't agree with you is a good thing, while having a wank is a mortal sin. Burning oxes before the sabbath because the odor pleases the lord is good, but putting a dick up one's bottom is a mortal sin. If two people have sex outside of a narrowly defined set of circumstances, it is OK to stone them to death in the village square, but it is a horrible sin to show someone a breast.
Not all religions agree with one another, and some (i.e. Unitarians) are actually fervent supporters of gay rights.
These examples just serve to illustrate the complete moral bankruptcy of many religious writings. These books were not exactly written during the renaissance.
I don't recall saying anything about books but, um, okay.
[...] but it has been proven that schizophrenia and epilepsia do cause religious visions, and hence religious beliefs.
No, religious beliefs are caused by someone (typically family, ministers, etc.) telling them to you, and then by you believing them. Psychotic episodes don't cause completely original viewpoints to come into ones mind.
There is a researcher called Dick Swaab in the Netherlands that has done interesting work on simulating certain attacks by use of electrodes in humans and has thus been able to conjure up end-of-life visions, out-of-body experiences and religious epiphanies with the flick of a switch.
You may be interested to know that there is a researcher in the US called Feelma Vulva who has done some even more exciting work in the study of people responding to things that weren't actually said. Check it out.
Do please enlighten me: Is stoning your brother's wife for adultery right or wrong? Is killing gay people right or wrong?
I don't need to enlighten you. All I do is toss your questions into my Relig-o-Matic 3000 system-for-telling-right-from-wrong and...*poof*...out pops the answer, thus proving my point. By the way, most religious leaders would quite obviously find those things to be wrong. How you and so many others (with similarly sized chips on your shoulders) can't see that is beyond me.
Hint: There's the religious answer, and there's the answer deemed acceptable in modern Western civilisation.
...because religion neither exists in, nor is a part of, modern Western civilization?
Face it, religious dogma and indoctrination is WRONG. I don't need a fucking religion to tell me that.
Life is not a series of black-and-white dilemmas with obvious answers. For the not-so-obvious issues, the theist turns to his faith while others may turn to the study of ethics. And then there are those like yourself who seem to deny the existence of such issues while having misplaced knee-jerk reactions to the (completely unspecified) beliefs of others.
As a Catholic, I am obliged to completely agree with evolution, because Pope John Paul II, Pontiff of the Holy Roman Catholic and Apostolic Church decreed that it is a valid and true theory, and have no problems with it being taught [...]
[...] this can only mean one of two things, according to Kaspersky:
Store full plaintext passwords in their database and then compare the first 16 chars only.
Calculate the hash only on the first 16 and ignore the rest.
I’m fairly certain Microsoft isn’t stupid enough to go with the first option. Storing passwords in clear text would be a disaster,
I wouldn't doubt for a second that MS would go with the first option. They are, after all, competing with Yahoo:-) Also, wasn't it Microsoft that came up with the oxymoronical term "reversible encryption"?
On the other hand, Hotmail was originally built on FreeBSD by non-MS types, so who knows? To this day I still find it amusing to think of all the difficulty they must have had porting the platform to Windows.
Traffic analysis does not require decryption. Someone watching the traffic can still see that you are on Wikipedia, what time you were on the site, how long, and the approximate size of the content you downloaded...or uploaded for that matter.
Say you submitted a post; even encrypted its still possible to see that more bytes were sent than in a normal GET request. Even if your IP is hidden behind your WP login, it is feasibly possible that the timestamp combined with the approximate byte count could be used to identify you. Of course, HTTP keepalives would make this more difficult, but other tricks like checking the referrer header when clicking off to another site could betray you. Even if you are just clicking around, it could be possible to establish a fingerprint of your traffic pattern, using things like byte counts, number of concurrent connections (to identify the number of images on the page perhaps?), etc. that could be used to identify the pages you visited.
No, I'm sorry, but your analogy is flawed. What actually happened was that Judge Dredd used his Lawgiver-II grenade launcher to destroy a car that was ilegally parked. Within seconds he triumphantly announced that justice had been served via his megaphone. Minutes later, other cars in the megacity were trembling with fear. It wasn't until several hours later that the coucil of judges came up with an adequate rationaliztion for what, on the surface, appeared to be an egregious misuse of police force.
This article reeks of FUD. The technical challenge alone is pretty unbelievable when you think about it. It's one thing to set up layer 3 policy-based QoS on a handful of service provider core switches, but to coordinate that policy across hundreds of access level devices is quite difficult to say the least...assuming those devices even support it. Never mind that the relationship of consumer to service provider has been less the focus of net neutrality policy than the issue of fairness to content providers.
You'll still be able to add your my-cat-fluffys-enterprise-weblog.com and it will still work.
That's unfortunate because, as others have noted, the hosts file "feature" is indeed a relic of a bygone era that should be laid permanently to rest rather than being broken for certain use cases. There seem to be two camps here; the ones that say "leave our beloved feature intact!" and those who say "kill it for the sake of the enterprise!" They are both right -- What MS should do is not break the hosts file or make it behave inconsistently, but replace it with something better.
A Windows service that allows DNS names to be overridden by user request is what is called for here. It could be added as a supported feature...something that is controlled by group policy and managed through Windows RM to satisfy the enterprise IT folks...something with a nice UI and possibly new features like pattern matching for the ad-blocking/web-developing user base.
Practically speaking that probably won't happen, as it's always easier to shoot a piece of software in the head than actually improve or replace it...
...post a lenghty rant about miscoceptions of Android users, and quote the OP too. Unfortunately, I'm posting from an Android device and do not posess such skills.
...is how these sprites being sold to us. Yet it wasn't what Sputnik did while in orbit that made it such a marvel, but the ingenuity that got it there. This is a neat idea, but sorry, geek cred can't be bought for $300 or any other amount. For the same money I could build a rocket that would not make it a fraction of the distance (assuming it didn't blow up on the launch pad), but it would be uniquely mine, as would be whatever "cred" that came with it.
It's been a while since I looked at Xen so I decided to do some searching to see what additional value XenServer adds to it. I found this document, which says:
Differentiation between virtualization offerings, and between Xen offerings, comes from the value added management features enabled by the parent console.
...and not much else. They took an open-source project, "bought" it for $500 million, did nothing more than put a GUI on it, and were then shocked to discover that no one wanted to buy it. Corporate incompetence never ceases to amaze.
Slashdot Mirror
From whom? I was told many years ago by a retired agent who gave a talk at my high school's career day that their unofficial policy was to not hire anyone *under* the age of 30, because they wanted you to have several years of practical experience in some related field before they would consider you for a position.
There are tons of professions where knowing how to write good code will help you achieve success over the competition. Computer programmer isn't one of them.
Ah yes, because you were a hedge fund manager as a kid, right?
Regardless of what you think you "know" about the markets, it takes lots of cold, hard cash to actually make money off of it.
This! Don't give super-mutant birds a chance to be born. Use the solar array against the NCR instead! Residents of the Mojave wasteland will thank you.
...should be the ultimate goal. Understand the design, get it under basic control and then work with a team (largest you can muster) of diligent specialists to design replacement systems that are firewalled off from the original. The reasons for this are twofold:
1) No matter how well documented, well designed, etc. the system is, your knowledge of it will never be perfectly complete and you'll never be able to turn around changes with the same degree of confidence and alacrity as the original admin.
2) Your Career -- If you bend over backwards to make the system work perfectly the original designer will still get most of the credit. If you try your best but the system falls short of expectations, you will take the blame as the new "owner" of the system. It's a lose-lose proposition. Building something new, something that you can demonstrate is supported by more than just one person (unlike the original) will be a feather in your cap.
Only three years on the job? Pop a champagne bottle and rejoice...
Some 'tussin will get her ass back on the street in no time!
That is exactly it: group bonding through shared experience.
Others would call it hazing
Killing the city of Jericho, Sodom and Gomorra because they don't agree with you is a good thing, while having a wank is a mortal sin. Burning oxes before the sabbath because the odor pleases the lord is good, but putting a dick up one's bottom is a mortal sin. If two people have sex outside of a narrowly defined set of circumstances, it is OK to stone them to death in the village square, but it is a horrible sin to show someone a breast.
Not all religions agree with one another, and some (i.e. Unitarians) are actually fervent supporters of gay rights.
These examples just serve to illustrate the complete moral bankruptcy of many religious writings. These books were not exactly written during the renaissance.
I don't recall saying anything about books but, um, okay.
[...] but it has been proven that schizophrenia and epilepsia do cause religious visions, and hence religious beliefs.
No, religious beliefs are caused by someone (typically family, ministers, etc.) telling them to you, and then by you believing them. Psychotic episodes don't cause completely original viewpoints to come into ones mind.
There is a researcher called Dick Swaab in the Netherlands that has done interesting work on simulating certain attacks by use of electrodes in humans and has thus been able to conjure up end-of-life visions, out-of-body experiences and religious epiphanies with the flick of a switch.
You may be interested to know that there is a researcher in the US called Feelma Vulva who has done some even more exciting work in the study of people responding to things that weren't actually said. Check it out.
Do please enlighten me: Is stoning your brother's wife for adultery right or wrong? Is killing gay people right or wrong?
I don't need to enlighten you. All I do is toss your questions into my Relig-o-Matic 3000 system-for-telling-right-from-wrong and...*poof*...out pops the answer, thus proving my point. By the way, most religious leaders would quite obviously find those things to be wrong. How you and so many others (with similarly sized chips on your shoulders) can't see that is beyond me.
Hint: There's the religious answer, and there's the answer deemed acceptable in modern Western civilisation.
...because religion neither exists in, nor is a part of, modern Western civilization?
Face it, religious dogma and indoctrination is WRONG. I don't need a fucking religion to tell me that.
Life is not a series of black-and-white dilemmas with obvious answers. For the not-so-obvious issues, the theist turns to his faith while others may turn to the study of ethics. And then there are those like yourself who seem to deny the existence of such issues while having misplaced knee-jerk reactions to the (completely unspecified) beliefs of others.
This perpetuates a society which can't distinguish between right and wrong,
Huh? The world's religions, each and every one of them, are a system for doing just that!
real and imagined,
Religion does not cause schizophrenia. That is a scientific fact whether you choose to believe in it or not.
and fosters abuse of the minority (be it communists, pedophiles, [...]
Yeah! Especially those darn Unitarians, always abusing pedophiles and other minorities!
As a Catholic, I am obliged to completely agree with evolution, because Pope John Paul II, Pontiff of the Holy Roman Catholic and Apostolic Church decreed that it is a valid and true theory , and have no problems with it being taught [...]
FTFY
Here's your chance, hack hotmail, and get a treasure chest of emails and passwords, and subsequent Bank password reset opportunities...
Thanks, but the real opportunity was back in 1999 when they limited your password to two characters. Now those were some good times!
From TFA:
[...] this can only mean one of two things, according to Kaspersky:
Store full plaintext passwords in their database and then compare the first 16 chars only.
Calculate the hash only on the first 16 and ignore the rest.
I’m fairly certain Microsoft isn’t stupid enough to go with the first option. Storing passwords in clear text would be a disaster,
I wouldn't doubt for a second that MS would go with the first option. They are, after all, competing with Yahoo :-) Also, wasn't it Microsoft that came up with the oxymoronical term "reversible encryption"?
On the other hand, Hotmail was originally built on FreeBSD by non-MS types, so who knows? To this day I still find it amusing to think of all the difficulty they must have had porting the platform to Windows.
(stupid slashdot thinks mysql's output are junk characters)
...because leading a comment with superfluous CLI output is exactly what a smarter Slashdot would want you to do, right?
(Protip: There's a code-post mode if you really need to do that)
Traffic analysis does not require decryption. Someone watching the traffic can still see that you are on Wikipedia, what time you were on the site, how long, and the approximate size of the content you downloaded...or uploaded for that matter.
Say you submitted a post; even encrypted its still possible to see that more bytes were sent than in a normal GET request. Even if your IP is hidden behind your WP login, it is feasibly possible that the timestamp combined with the approximate byte count could be used to identify you. Of course, HTTP keepalives would make this more difficult, but other tricks like checking the referrer header when clicking off to another site could betray you. Even if you are just clicking around, it could be possible to establish a fingerprint of your traffic pattern, using things like byte counts, number of concurrent connections (to identify the number of images on the page perhaps?), etc. that could be used to identify the pages you visited.
No, I'm sorry, but your analogy is flawed. What actually happened was that Judge Dredd used his Lawgiver-II grenade launcher to destroy a car that was ilegally parked. Within seconds he triumphantly announced that justice had been served via his megaphone. Minutes later, other cars in the megacity were trembling with fear. It wasn't until several hours later that the coucil of judges came up with an adequate rationaliztion for what, on the surface, appeared to be an egregious misuse of police force.
FTFY.
This article reeks of FUD. The technical challenge alone is pretty unbelievable when you think about it. It's one thing to set up layer 3 policy-based QoS on a handful of service provider core switches, but to coordinate that policy across hundreds of access level devices is quite difficult to say the least...assuming those devices even support it. Never mind that the relationship of consumer to service provider has been less the focus of net neutrality policy than the issue of fairness to content providers.
You'll still be able to add your my-cat-fluffys-enterprise-weblog.com and it will still work.
That's unfortunate because, as others have noted, the hosts file "feature" is indeed a relic of a bygone era that should be laid permanently to rest rather than being broken for certain use cases. There seem to be two camps here; the ones that say "leave our beloved feature intact!" and those who say "kill it for the sake of the enterprise!" They are both right -- What MS should do is not break the hosts file or make it behave inconsistently, but replace it with something better.
A Windows service that allows DNS names to be overridden by user request is what is called for here. It could be added as a supported feature ...something that is controlled by group policy and managed through Windows RM to satisfy the enterprise IT folks ...something with a nice UI and possibly new features like pattern matching for the ad-blocking/web-developing user base.
Practically speaking that probably won't happen, as it's always easier to shoot a piece of software in the head than actually improve or replace it...
...post a lenghty rant about miscoceptions of Android users, and quote the OP too. Unfortunately, I'm posting from an Android device and do not posess such skills.
...after the gubernment takes them away you'll be glad you did! Just in time for the epochalyse too!
...is how these sprites being sold to us. Yet it wasn't what Sputnik did while in orbit that made it such a marvel, but the ingenuity that got it there. This is a neat idea, but sorry, geek cred can't be bought for $300 or any other amount. For the same money I could build a rocket that would not make it a fraction of the distance (assuming it didn't blow up on the launch pad), but it would be uniquely mine, as would be whatever "cred" that came with it.
what new security considerations do I need to make in managing these services?
All of them! :D
(Good luck with that)
It's been a while since I looked at Xen so I decided to do some searching to see what additional value XenServer adds to it. I found this document, which says:
Differentiation between virtualization offerings, and between Xen offerings, comes from the value added management features enabled by the parent console.
...and not much else. They took an open-source project, "bought" it for $500 million, did nothing more than put a GUI on it, and were then shocked to discover that no one wanted to buy it. Corporate incompetence never ceases to amaze.
Unlimited cpus, unlimited cores, unlimited RAM.
That wasn't always the case. I suspect someone came along and informed them that their software is open-source.