Scripting in csh is considered harmful. Since real console lovers don't differentiate between interactive use and script writing, this also applies to csh as an interactive shell. So no, csh is not the shell of choice, at least not for me.
DUH, of course - if permission is not blocked - you can as well do rm -fr. It's not like some random kid on the net can upgrade your Linux if you have port 22 open to the world. Get a clue.
I have heard of racing games where steering becomes jerky or economy simulations where your cash would disappear or you'd lose random amounts of it over time.
After all, I think FADE is a very psychological thing. If you think about how it should tell legal use from illegal use.. If they really could detect copies properly why not just refuse to run at all? Just scare tactic if you ask me.
RAID 1 schemes (1, 0+1, 10) are also capable of running without a performance hit when one drive fails, unlike RAID 3/4/5 systems, some implementations of which cannot run at all until rebuilt.
Isn't it the point of RAID[345] to not only provide data integrity but also accessibility in the case of a failure? What good is a RAID[345] if it needs to be rebuilt before providing the data again?
The advantage of one of these devices is that you plug it in, turn it on and it just works. That means, you can go back to doing profitable work sooner.
Uh yeah, those pesky unprofitable tasks of setting up your IT infrastructure properly. I bet this box has a sticker "admin monkey not included".
Unpack, plug in, forget is a wet dream of marketing wankers. Every device on a network should be maintained.
Another site, hosted by the Polish group. offers free credit consultations. Traceroutes to the site, removeform.com, also provided ever-changing results, ranging from a computer connected to a DSL line in Israel to another provided by EarthLink. However, the title of the site's home page consistently read "Yahoo Web Hosting," suggesting it was actually located on a server run by the Internet giant.
Ok, so I tried:
$ dig removeform.com [...] ANSWER SECTION: removeform.com. 25m5s IN CNAME bestportal.biz. bestportal.biz. 25m6s IN A 1.1.1.1
AUTHORITY SECTION: bestportal.biz. 55m6s IN NS dns1.name-services.com. bestportal.biz. 55m6s IN NS dns2.name-services.com. bestportal.biz. 55m6s IN NS dns3.name-services.com. bestportal.biz. 55m6s IN NS dns4.name-services.com. bestportal.biz. 55m6s IN NS dns5.name-services.com.
ADDITIONAL SECTION: dns1.name-services.com. 1d9h11m38s IN A 63.251.163.102 dns2.name-services.com. 1d9h11m38s IN A 216.52.184.230 dns3.name-services.com. 1d9h11m38s IN A 63.251.83.36 dns3.name-services.com. 1d9h11m38s IN A 63.251.83.37 dns4.name-services.com. 1d9h11m38s IN A 64.74.96.225 dns4.name-services.com. 1d9h11m38s IN A 64.74.96.226 dns5.name-services.com. 1d9h11m38s IN A 212.118.244.163 dns5.name-services.com. 1d9h11m38s IN A 212.118.244.164
Surely looks fishy. Trying to go to that site fails, naturally. However, since I run my own DNS cache:
Oct 10 00:41:00 charon named[310]: unrelated additional info 'dns1.name-services.com' type A from [63.251.83.36].53 Oct 10 00:41:00 charon named[310]: unrelated additional info 'dns1.name-services.com' type A from [63.251.83.36].53 Oct 10 00:41:00 charon named[310]: unrelated additional info 'dns2.name-services.com' type A from [63.251.83.36].53 Oct 10 00:41:00 charon named[310]: unrelated additional info 'dns2.name-services.com' type A from [63.251.83.36].53 Oct 10 00:41:00 charon named[310]: unrelated additional info 'dns3.name-services.com' type A from [63.251.83.36].53 Oct 10 00:41:00 charon last message repeated 3 times Oct 10 00:41:00 charon named[310]: unrelated additional info 'dns4.name-services.com' type A from [63.251.83.36].53 Oct 10 00:41:00 charon last message repeated 3 times Oct 10 00:41:00 charon named[310]: unrelated additional info 'dns5.name-services.com' type A from [63.251.83.36].53 Oct 10 00:41:00 charon last message repeated 3 times
What they actually do seems to be poisoning people's DNS caches with the constantly changing info, since the real answer to the query is the CNAME which in turn points to 1.1.1.1. I cannot go to that site. My BIND thus protects me?
Slashdot Mirror
Scripting in csh is considered harmful. Since real console lovers don't differentiate between interactive use and script writing, this also applies to csh as an interactive shell. So no, csh is not the shell of choice, at least not for me.
The csh/tcsh default in freebsd is a mystery.
Huh? To quote master.passwd:
root::0:0::0:0:Charlie &:/root:/bin/csh
I like "hatred" more.
DUH, of course - if permission is not blocked - you can as well do rm -fr. It's not like some random kid on the net can upgrade your Linux if you have port 22 open to the world. Get a clue.
Don't SETI@Home and Prime95 do something with FFT? Or am I mixing something up here?
Where is the problem? OpenPGP successfully provides selective access to "content" as well, doesn't it?
Wow, spending currency to obtain goods is 2, Interesting. /. people really need to get out more.
Not that I do, but that's beside the point!
I have heard of racing games where steering becomes jerky or economy simulations where your cash would disappear or you'd lose random amounts of it over time.
After all, I think FADE is a very psychological thing. If you think about how it should tell legal use from illegal use.. If they really could detect copies properly why not just refuse to run at all? Just scare tactic if you ask me.
RFC 791 begs to differ
No, this is the standard attempt to hide the real host behind a username. Nothing to do with exploit.
t se .cx
/kof03_video.WMV@goatse.cx was not found on this server.
http://www.snkneogeousa.com/kof03_video.WMV@goa
What this troll failed to realize is it doesn't work in the path part of the url.
The requested URL
Amateur..
anyone?
Warning: mysql_connect(): Too many connections in /public/private/groklaw/system/databases/mysql.cla ss.php on line 108 Cannnot connect to DB server
heh
Last time I checked "denial" was a noun.
I would love to have a small box with only a serial port and dual Intel lan that uses 10W and is fanless. Oh, and for 200.
RAID 1 schemes (1, 0+1, 10) are also capable of running without a performance hit when one drive fails, unlike RAID 3/4/5 systems, some implementations of which cannot run at all until rebuilt.
Isn't it the point of RAID[345] to not only provide data integrity but also accessibility in the case of a failure? What good is a RAID[345] if it needs to be rebuilt before providing the data again?
The advantage of one of these devices is that you plug it in, turn it on and it just works. That means, you can go back to doing profitable work sooner.
Uh yeah, those pesky unprofitable tasks of setting up your IT infrastructure properly. I bet this box has a sticker "admin monkey not included".
Unpack, plug in, forget is a wet dream of marketing wankers. Every device on a network should be maintained.
This evening, my daughters asked me. "Why do the other kids laugh at us?"
I wanted to tell them the truth - it's because they wear old clothes and have cheap haircuts. I can't afford anything better for them right now.
"It's because they are idiots, kids", I told them. "Don't listen to them."
When the kids went to bed, my wife asked me, "Will we be able to keep the house, David?"
I just shook my head, and tried to hold back the tears. "I don't know, Jenny. I don't know."
Would you like cheese with that whine? Couldn't have made your troll more cinematic, huh?
Have you ever looked at e.g. *BSD man pages?
If anything it's safer, as you don't have to turn to face the other person.
You turn your face to the person you are talking to? What are you? Some uberextrovert?
Only if you travel to the future and look from there.
Another site, hosted by the Polish group. offers free credit consultations. Traceroutes to the site, removeform.com, also provided ever-changing results, ranging from a computer connected to a DSL line in Israel to another provided by EarthLink. However, the title of the site's home page consistently read "Yahoo Web Hosting," suggesting it was actually located on a server run by the Internet giant.
Ok, so I tried:
$ dig removeform.com
[...]
ANSWER SECTION:
removeform.com. 25m5s IN CNAME bestportal.biz.
bestportal.biz. 25m6s IN A 1.1.1.1
AUTHORITY SECTION:
bestportal.biz. 55m6s IN NS dns1.name-services.com.
bestportal.biz. 55m6s IN NS dns2.name-services.com.
bestportal.biz. 55m6s IN NS dns3.name-services.com.
bestportal.biz. 55m6s IN NS dns4.name-services.com.
bestportal.biz. 55m6s IN NS dns5.name-services.com.
ADDITIONAL SECTION:
dns1.name-services.com. 1d9h11m38s IN A 63.251.163.102
dns2.name-services.com. 1d9h11m38s IN A 216.52.184.230
dns3.name-services.com. 1d9h11m38s IN A 63.251.83.36
dns3.name-services.com. 1d9h11m38s IN A 63.251.83.37
dns4.name-services.com. 1d9h11m38s IN A 64.74.96.225
dns4.name-services.com. 1d9h11m38s IN A 64.74.96.226
dns5.name-services.com. 1d9h11m38s IN A 212.118.244.163
dns5.name-services.com. 1d9h11m38s IN A 212.118.244.164
Surely looks fishy. Trying to go to that site fails, naturally. However, since I run my own DNS cache:
Oct 10 00:41:00 charon named[310]: unrelated additional info 'dns1.name-services.com' type A from [63.251.83.36].53
Oct 10 00:41:00 charon named[310]: unrelated additional info 'dns1.name-services.com' type A from [63.251.83.36].53
Oct 10 00:41:00 charon named[310]: unrelated additional info 'dns2.name-services.com' type A from [63.251.83.36].53
Oct 10 00:41:00 charon named[310]: unrelated additional info 'dns2.name-services.com' type A from [63.251.83.36].53
Oct 10 00:41:00 charon named[310]: unrelated additional info 'dns3.name-services.com' type A from [63.251.83.36].53
Oct 10 00:41:00 charon last message repeated 3 times
Oct 10 00:41:00 charon named[310]: unrelated additional info 'dns4.name-services.com' type A from [63.251.83.36].53
Oct 10 00:41:00 charon last message repeated 3 times
Oct 10 00:41:00 charon named[310]: unrelated additional info 'dns5.name-services.com' type A from [63.251.83.36].53
Oct 10 00:41:00 charon last message repeated 3 times
What they actually do seems to be poisoning people's DNS caches with the constantly changing info, since the real answer to the query is the CNAME which in turn points to 1.1.1.1. I cannot go to that site. My BIND thus protects me?
Excuse me? Are you serious by saying that you wrote this book and actually did NOT know the cron man page?
What a narrow mind.
Should be more like
$ echo "2^64/1024/1024/1024/1024" | bc
16777216
16M TB, they're only off by a factor of 2097152.
Are you sure about the *2/3 part? IIRC RAID5 is N-1 usable disks, giving you 1TB storage (5x200G) with 6 disks.