Wouldn't it be cool if KVMs had a little LCD screen on the front that showed the ACTUAL hostname of the computer they were currently talking to? Since any modern KVM is connected to the keyboard via USB, I'm sure you could whip up a basic protocol to ride over USB, in tandem with a little piece of code installed on the server, to communicate the hostname.
Okay, I've documented it and dated it, where do I get my patent?:)
System management got outsourced to Singapore, he then left the company, so Singapore deleted his account. We were left trying to reconstruct was was left from a dd image copy of the disk.
This one drives me CRAZY. Yes, it's downright stupid to have critical things running under employee accounts. But the worse failing, I think, is this silly idea that once somebody has left all traces of them must be eradicated from the universe, as if the ghost of their keypresses will arise from the ashes of their workstation and take over the entire company. So there's a user account called "jshmoe." Just because it's called "jshmoe" doesn't mean it's Joe Shmoe's account! Who gives a crap what the name on the account is? There could be, and often is, VITALLY important stuff in there. In a perfect world, all critical data would immediately be placed into a company-wide repository, but we don't live in Perfectland. Slow the hell down, look at what you're deleting, and get over your DAMN IMMATURITY AND PARANOIA.
What does that do? A cursory google search got me nothing of any use in explaining what that does.
When Googling UNIX-specific stuff, especially with terms as generic as something like "df", it often helps to insert the word "man" as an additional search term: "man df" Little tip'o'the day.
Sorry, but I've done with my BOFH days - as far as I am concerned, all the technical knowledge in my head is pretty much open source. If someone asks me something and they're interested in hearing my solution, that's good enough for me to tell them.
But that's not even the same thing. Offering help when asked is commendable. This is a far cry from, for example, walking into a senior developer's office and randomly saying "Hey, make sure you do an update before committing, or you'll waste somebody else's change." At a certain point you assume people know how to do their jobs. If you had reason to believe the person is not capable of performing the task, you educate them -- if you suspect that they won't learn even when told, maybe you should hire someone else.
So if you're so clever, how come you didn't warn the guy that might happen at the time?
Maybe because wandering around the office continually reminding professionals how to do their own jobs (assuming they are competent), makes you an arrogant asshole?
"Hey Ted, I know we hired you because you're all pro and stuff, but don't forget [some mind-numbingly obvious thing]. Seriously, I'm just trying to help, not implying that you're dumb as a rock."
He stepped over the line the moment he gave the information to another classmate. He HAD to know there was something wrong with that. I can understand perhaps not telling the school staff about it, due to the "shoot the messenger" phenomenon, but anybody with a shred of morality would have destroyed the information, not given it to another KID.
I agree that jail time would have been a pretty harsh penalty, considering the real parties at fault were not facing anything even close to that.
I have to agree that SE diverges in very important ways from other engineering disciplines. Perhaps it's not even engineering at all. There are certainly many people who think so. I'm not decided on it. But as long as the common term for it (whatever "it" is) is Software Engineering, that's what I'll use. After all, one important concept from ALL types of engineering is the importance of consistency of terminology (although in this case it's perhaps not consistent ACROSS disciplines, but that's not true of science either)
Yes -- at least they chose good examples to demo the technology. Apache, Python, Eclipse, and Postgres really stand out not only in terms of project size but in the quality of project MANAGEMENT.
Lots of commits isn't really a measure of developer productivity or worth. Among other things, it might just mean a scatter-brained developer who commits lots of unrelated, mostly useless changes, or somebody who continually writes bugs then has to back them out. More seasoned programmers will tend to make fewer, but larger commits.
Something open source seems to lack in general is project stability. With so little central oversight, changes tend to happen without people really thinking things through, many times without any clear motivation for the change other than simply pumping out code in order to look "active."
Software engineering as a discipline has been working for decades to come up with a heuristic to evaluate programmer productivity, and we're still nowhere close, although there are literally hundreds of formulas in use.
Of course, it's flashy and cool, but I worry that this will only encourage people to make more commits instead of actually using their brains.
I think being able to embolden/italicize words and use non-Latin character sets is a decent enough set of features. Why re-invent the wheel when HTML already provides mechanisms to do those things? Why not just have the clients support a subset of the markup instead of the whole deal?
The two ends could build an map, where instead of transmitting a duplicate chunk you just send "It's the same as chunk #123".
Great -- now, if an attacker manages to decrypt "chunk #123" they now know the contents of ALL chunks labelled "chunk #123." I can't see how that's good.
Degaussing the drives would be pointless. It destroys the low level formatting, possibly permanently. If the intention is to resell the drives, what's the point of rendering them unusable? Just zero the dang thing. If the data is so important that you're afraid of people with high-tech equipment to recover data from a zeroed drive, maybe you shouldn't be selling them in the first place.
I believe that God wants me to do certain things (love others, charity, compassion, forgiveness), and not do other things (hatred, spitefulness). I think these are rather universal to the organized religion (mine and other Christian denominations).
That's funny. I believe those same things. It's because "my momma taught me so." I've internalized it, and now it's in the core of my being. I see no reason to appeal to a God to explain why.
Teach skepticism by example. Set the person up for failure if they're not skeptical. After getting burned repeatedly by their own gullibility the person will begin to catch on. This is the sort of thing you learn by experience -- it's not like teaching multiplication tables.
Then TFA doens't show a method to magically guess was is being said over a crypted channel only by looking at the bitrates, it only says that it finds some predetermined pattern in a given set of samples to test against.
I don't care. Good cryptosystems should be absolutely impenetrable. Even the smallest flaw is like a crack in a dike. Maybe it will expand and blow the dike, maybe it won't. But it's simply UNACCEPTABLE to have cracks in the dike, and it's UNACCCEPTABLE to have known weaknesses. Whether those weaknesses lead to a full-disclosure attack or not. In the world of cryptography there is no such thing as "good enough." It's either perfect, for the moment, with no known attacks, or it's a piece of shit. There is no gray area.
Hahaha! Compressing encrypted data?! My sides are splitting!
In case you can't figure it out: good encryption makes data look completely random. Do you know of any algorithms which compress PURELY RANDOM data? I sure as hell don't.
Time/space attacks are well known. Somebody who actually, hmm, UNDERSTOOD cryptographic security would never have designed the protocol this way in the first place.
The people suggesting that we should just inject noise or background patterns are being ridiculous. Why sacrifice communication quality when there are BETTER ways to fix it? DO IT RIGHT.
I dared to point out that while a haggard wife spends her time chasing her daughter around while her husband spends "his life" sitting in a chair (that the poor woman has been kind enough to PURCHASE for him, on top of that), there might be something wrong.
My son is 10 months old as well, and I honestly can't imagine wasting this time of his life (the kid is practically walking at this point) dorking around on the Internet. Some other AC said my wife is "intolerant" because she wouldn't put up with that. And then people wonder why they can't even get a date, much less a wife.
I can sort of see where you're coming from, but as a parent of a young boy I really just have to say... that's just how people talk about it. I don't think people intend to de-personify their children when they speak this way.
The topic of conversation between parents often revolves around the childrens age. This is because at such a young age, the child's behavior and ability changes rapidly from month to month. So we can exchange war stories about what he was doing at 6, 7, 8 months.
Unless the age is the specific topic, I refer to my kid as "my son." With people I know, I use his name.
Of course, it begs the question of whether his time at home is 'off time' or 'work time.'
Submitter said: "He spends his life in this chair." I get an image of a guy sitting in front of Slashdot while his extremely worn-out wife "chases her 10 month old around." If that's not true, then fine.
Am I being judgmental? You betcha. Since I had kids that developed in me spontaneously. At least I confine my judgment to Slashdot posts.
Slashdot Mirror
Or rather... wouldn't do? I can sure think of several times where I've typed "rm" and ended up wishing /bin/rm had gone missing.
Wouldn't it be cool if KVMs had a little LCD screen on the front that showed the ACTUAL hostname of the computer they were currently talking to? Since any modern KVM is connected to the keyboard via USB, I'm sure you could whip up a basic protocol to ride over USB, in tandem with a little piece of code installed on the server, to communicate the hostname.
Okay, I've documented it and dated it, where do I get my patent? :)
System management got outsourced to Singapore, he then left the company, so Singapore deleted his account. We were left trying to reconstruct was was left from a dd image copy of the disk.
This one drives me CRAZY. Yes, it's downright stupid to have critical things running under employee accounts. But the worse failing, I think, is this silly idea that once somebody has left all traces of them must be eradicated from the universe, as if the ghost of their keypresses will arise from the ashes of their workstation and take over the entire company. So there's a user account called "jshmoe." Just because it's called "jshmoe" doesn't mean it's Joe Shmoe's account! Who gives a crap what the name on the account is? There could be, and often is, VITALLY important stuff in there. In a perfect world, all critical data would immediately be placed into a company-wide repository, but we don't live in Perfectland. Slow the hell down, look at what you're deleting, and get over your DAMN IMMATURITY AND PARANOIA.
What does that do? A cursory google search got me nothing of any use in explaining what that does.
When Googling UNIX-specific stuff, especially with terms as generic as something like "df", it often helps to insert the word "man" as an additional search term: "man df" Little tip'o'the day.
Sorry, but I've done with my BOFH days - as far as I am concerned, all the technical knowledge in my head is pretty much open source. If someone asks me something and they're interested in hearing my solution, that's good enough for me to tell them.
But that's not even the same thing. Offering help when asked is commendable. This is a far cry from, for example, walking into a senior developer's office and randomly saying "Hey, make sure you do an update before committing, or you'll waste somebody else's change." At a certain point you assume people know how to do their jobs. If you had reason to believe the person is not capable of performing the task, you educate them -- if you suspect that they won't learn even when told, maybe you should hire someone else.
So if you're so clever, how come you didn't warn the guy that might happen at the time?
Maybe because wandering around the office continually reminding professionals how to do their own jobs (assuming they are competent), makes you an arrogant asshole?
"Hey Ted, I know we hired you because you're all pro and stuff, but don't forget [some mind-numbingly obvious thing]. Seriously, I'm just trying to help, not implying that you're dumb as a rock."
He stepped over the line the moment he gave the information to another classmate. He HAD to know there was something wrong with that. I can understand perhaps not telling the school staff about it, due to the "shoot the messenger" phenomenon, but anybody with a shred of morality would have destroyed the information, not given it to another KID.
I agree that jail time would have been a pretty harsh penalty, considering the real parties at fault were not facing anything even close to that.
I have to agree that SE diverges in very important ways from other engineering disciplines. Perhaps it's not even engineering at all. There are certainly many people who think so. I'm not decided on it. But as long as the common term for it (whatever "it" is) is Software Engineering, that's what I'll use. After all, one important concept from ALL types of engineering is the importance of consistency of terminology (although in this case it's perhaps not consistent ACROSS disciplines, but that's not true of science either)
Yes -- at least they chose good examples to demo the technology. Apache, Python, Eclipse, and Postgres really stand out not only in terms of project size but in the quality of project MANAGEMENT.
Lots of commits isn't really a measure of developer productivity or worth. Among other things, it might just mean a scatter-brained developer who commits lots of unrelated, mostly useless changes, or somebody who continually writes bugs then has to back them out. More seasoned programmers will tend to make fewer, but larger commits.
Something open source seems to lack in general is project stability. With so little central oversight, changes tend to happen without people really thinking things through, many times without any clear motivation for the change other than simply pumping out code in order to look "active."
Software engineering as a discipline has been working for decades to come up with a heuristic to evaluate programmer productivity, and we're still nowhere close, although there are literally hundreds of formulas in use.
Of course, it's flashy and cool, but I worry that this will only encourage people to make more commits instead of actually using their brains.
I think being able to embolden/italicize words and use non-Latin character sets is a decent enough set of features. Why re-invent the wheel when HTML already provides mechanisms to do those things? Why not just have the clients support a subset of the markup instead of the whole deal?
The two ends could build an map, where instead of transmitting a duplicate chunk you just send "It's the same as chunk #123".
Great -- now, if an attacker manages to decrypt "chunk #123" they now know the contents of ALL chunks labelled "chunk #123." I can't see how that's good.
Damn. I apologize for the apostrophe abuse.
Sure, but this sort of defeats the purpose of VBR, since the resulting audio stream is random and thus VBR can't really do it's "thing."
Degaussing the drives would be pointless. It destroys the low level formatting, possibly permanently. If the intention is to resell the drives, what's the point of rendering them unusable? Just zero the dang thing. If the data is so important that you're afraid of people with high-tech equipment to recover data from a zeroed drive, maybe you shouldn't be selling them in the first place.
I believe that God wants me to do certain things (love others, charity, compassion, forgiveness), and not do other things (hatred, spitefulness). I think these are rather universal to the organized religion (mine and other Christian denominations).
That's funny. I believe those same things. It's because "my momma taught me so." I've internalized it, and now it's in the core of my being. I see no reason to appeal to a God to explain why.
Ummm, no. Every encryption algorithm is guaranteed to be vulnerable to brute force - trying every possible key value.
Okay, wise guy -- leaving aside brute force.
Teach skepticism by example. Set the person up for failure if they're not skeptical. After getting burned repeatedly by their own gullibility the person will begin to catch on. This is the sort of thing you learn by experience -- it's not like teaching multiplication tables.
I bet you that phone is not packet based, not compressed, and runs over a physically secure line. BIG fucking difference.
Then TFA doens't show a method to magically guess was is being said over a crypted channel only by looking at the bitrates, it only says that it finds some predetermined pattern in a given set of samples to test against.
I don't care. Good cryptosystems should be absolutely impenetrable. Even the smallest flaw is like a crack in a dike. Maybe it will expand and blow the dike, maybe it won't. But it's simply UNACCEPTABLE to have cracks in the dike, and it's UNACCCEPTABLE to have known weaknesses. Whether those weaknesses lead to a full-disclosure attack or not. In the world of cryptography there is no such thing as "good enough." It's either perfect, for the moment, with no known attacks, or it's a piece of shit. There is no gray area.
Hahaha! Compressing encrypted data?! My sides are splitting!
In case you can't figure it out: good encryption makes data look completely random. Do you know of any algorithms which compress PURELY RANDOM data? I sure as hell don't.
Time/space attacks are well known. Somebody who actually, hmm, UNDERSTOOD cryptographic security would never have designed the protocol this way in the first place.
The people suggesting that we should just inject noise or background patterns are being ridiculous. Why sacrifice communication quality when there are BETTER ways to fix it? DO IT RIGHT.
I dared to point out that while a haggard wife spends her time chasing her daughter around while her husband spends "his life" sitting in a chair (that the poor woman has been kind enough to PURCHASE for him, on top of that), there might be something wrong.
My son is 10 months old as well, and I honestly can't imagine wasting this time of his life (the kid is practically walking at this point) dorking around on the Internet. Some other AC said my wife is "intolerant" because she wouldn't put up with that. And then people wonder why they can't even get a date, much less a wife.
Please folks. Just don't reproduce, okay?
I can sort of see where you're coming from, but as a parent of a young boy I really just have to say... that's just how people talk about it. I don't think people intend to de-personify their children when they speak this way.
The topic of conversation between parents often revolves around the childrens age. This is because at such a young age, the child's behavior and ability changes rapidly from month to month. So we can exchange war stories about what he was doing at 6, 7, 8 months.
Unless the age is the specific topic, I refer to my kid as "my son." With people I know, I use his name.
Of course, it begs the question of whether his time at home is 'off time' or 'work time.'
Submitter said: "He spends his life in this chair." I get an image of a guy sitting in front of Slashdot while his extremely worn-out wife "chases her 10 month old around." If that's not true, then fine.
Am I being judgmental? You betcha. Since I had kids that developed in me spontaneously. At least I confine my judgment to Slashdot posts.