Woa, bell.ca is slashdotted. Time for a new meaning to 'telco-grade'! And I wonder how they can currently protect themselves from abuse; high-speed anonymous access=spammers/hackers haven!
What desktop users want to know..
on
AMD's 64-bit Plot
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
will it be faster than 32 bit offerings? For almost anyone out there, it's the only factor when buying a CPU: speed! Adressing >4Gb of memory is not that worries me first:)
And even whitelists are not 100% reliable: new viruses/trojans may collect emails from addressbooks and send spam with the From field altered to appear like a friend of yours (likely to be in your addressbook..). Now even your friends will spam you! (or so it will seem). As long as there's no M(ail)T(ransport)P(rotocol) which get rid of the overly S(implistic), without true authentication of the sender, we will get spam because email is public in the first place. Maybe something like email cookies would be a first step in trying to establish a pseudo-authentication system.
Well, I own an All-in-Wonder Radeon. It's not _that_ old (300USD a couple years ago), and it's unsupported by their unified driver! And I don't even talk about the multimedia features, TV in-out, which are mostly broken in Gatos tools/drivers and non existent in their own driver. I'm back on Win2k for the time being, partly because of this. And I wonder if my next purchase will be ATI, based on my current experience. Sad, because the hardware is rock-solid!
If what's inside is to be taken as facts, it's interesting to see that in a large scale environment: -IIS management is not easy (due to the metabase, and reloading their custom ISAPI module required an additionnal layer to do it without iisreset) -there's actually no equivalents for rdist, cron, syslog. They ported them to win32. -they had to hack the net driver to change MTU on the fly
More important to me: they had an hard time figuring out stuff because of the lack of documentation and all undocumented interfaces. They even didn't suspected all the CLI facilities of Win2000 (nor do I). So, W2K Server is powerful, yet it's setup in a bloated way making it difficult to manage. I wish some good papers would be written on the subject for all of us stuck with administring such boxes to benefit of other's experiences.
Nothing beats unices at servers tasks. Go figure what's wrong with a NT/2000 box! For the userland GUI, Windows is the thing since it's been designed for users, and PCs are build with MS in mind. I know nobody will get to read this post, but I thought I could add to up this story in the hall of fame =)
Another reason could be that Taco doesn't read other's stories and didn't see that the previous one was MS as well. Regarding free advertising, I don't think any more coverage could do anything to a buyer's decision. If you're willing to pay, you will anyway, and ditto if you don't.
The better solution is to get rid of the bastardization (PPOE). You obviously don't have to manage an ISP.. PPPoE allows a much greater control than PVC based, with: -session accounting -flexible user login control (radius, realms and so on) You don't need to reconfig a router manually for each customer, play with MAC addresses etc.
By the way, most PPPoE have an MTU set for 1492. But since most ISPs are using a telco platform and the sessions are forwarded over L2TP to their router, there's another 40 bytes to remove from the 1492.. The ideal MTU now being 1452 for PPPoE customers. If all clients had this set, nobody would have heard of MTU/MSS at all:-)
I think it's utopic to think one can fix so many's ISPs problems. It's like closing open relays, even with big real-time blocking lists, a lot still slip thru. A good paper explaining MTU/MSS is on Cisco. If your ISP can't just 'adjust-mss' on his router, either he will fragment a lot and drop the DF (don't fragment) packets, or you will have to use Dr TCP to fix the MTU on your side.
..a game is hardly the result of producers/developers; it's like humor, you can't have a recipe that works 100% for everybody. When there was passion and a few core geeks that developped games for themselves, the result had to be convincing. Now, with Hollywood budgets, planning, CG and all, how do you want a game to remain fun? Proof is, a lot of people still enjoy playing NES:-) As far as I'm concerned, "keep it simple".
I can't see how this is newsworthy, it's already in your/usr/share/doc/alsa-source/README.Debian.gz. And they use the far simpler make-kpkg instead of building manually with lengthy vars to define that nobody remembers. Ok, the big news was indeed: use apt-get install alsa-source and read the manual to get alsa to work on Debian;-)
Being a sysadmin myself, I wonder how you'll proceed: -put down the current slashdot -push the DB as fast as possible to the new facilities (or they were already mirrored in real time?) -switch the dns record
Do you mean that you're able to tell the difference between east and west coast based sites just by judging their speed? I don't think so! 60ms added latency won't make the slightest difference, and I'd even say that slashdot servers being integrated to the main OSDN server farm will get better care and will run smoother.
.. can you add some more power to wherever it's currently lacking? I found/. to be less responsive as of lately. Maybe you can merge both older and newer hardware to double the overall capacity?;)
Btw, something tells me brak is not ready for prime time..
It proved to be yet another nice illustration of politics efficiency; they do nothing for their users (consumers, they think), but they manage to obfuscate anything related to them, to be sure that they can grab a big amount of cash and still look legitimate. Now that we got the long awaited new TLDs, what are the next key thing they're waiting to screwup?
See BGPExpert AntiDOS paper. Why would routing to Null0 be more cpu intensive than to a physical interface? I guess some kind of hardware Null0 device could be emulated, if it becomes an issue.
It looks like uruklink.net is still vulnerable: -port 110 is opened -it reveals they're running Ipswitch IMail 7.07 -this software has a known overflow and exploit on the web client side -http://mail.uruklink.net:8383/ is opened.
What are their sysadmin waiting to shut down 110/8383? Wake up!
Side note, it's funny to see that they are running an american OS and mail software..
Can this source code be subjected to DMCA? Can its author be sued for reverse engineering? Is it planned that DRM features will be added at some point, or the above applies..
Here is a poem that illustrate the limitations of a computerized brain:
No program can say what another will do. Now, I won't just assert that, I'll prove it to you: I will prove that although you might work til you drop, you can't predict whether a program will stop.
Imagine we have a procedure called P that will snoop in the source code of programs to see there aren't infinite loops that go round and around; and P prints the word "Fine!" if no looping is found.
You feed in your code, and the input it needs, and then P takes them both and it studies and reads and computes whether things will all end as the should (as opposed to going loopy the way that they could).
Well, the truth is that P cannot possibly be, because if you wrote it and gave it to me, I could use it to set up a logical bind that would shatter your reason and scramble your mind.
Here's the trick I would use - and it's simple to do. I'd define a procedure - we'll name the thing Q - that would take and program and call P (of course!) to tell if it looped, by reading the source;
And if so, Q would simply print "Loop!" and then stop; but if no, Q would go right back to the top, and start off again, looping endlessly back, til the universe dies and is frozen and black.
And this program called Q wouldn't stay on the shelf; I would run it, and (fiendishly) feed it itself. What behaviour results when I do this with Q? When it reads its own source, just what will it do?
If P warns of loops, Q will print "Loop!" and quit; yet P is supposed to speak truly of it. So if Q's going to quit, then P should say, "Fine!" - which will make Q go back to its very first line!
No matter what P would have done, Q will scoop it: Q uses P's output to make P look stupid. If P gets things right then it lies in its tooth; and if it speaks falsely, it's telling the truth!
I've created a paradox, neat as can be - and simply by using your putative P. When you assumed P you stepped into a snare; Your assumptions have led you right into my lair.
So, how to escape from this logical mess? I don't have to tell you; I'm sure you can guess. By reductio, there cannot possibly be a procedure that acts like the mythical P.
You can never discover mechanical means for predicting the acts of computing machines. It's something that cannot be done. So we users must find our own bugs; our computers are losers!
by Geoffrey K. Pullum Stevenson College University of California
USB devices are PnP, given that USB service itself is installed/configured. And on Debian, load those modules: input mousedev hid usbcore usb-uhci buy putting them in/etc/modules and running/etc/init.d/modutils, and you'll be set. The remaining step is to actually plug the thing in the port, as you mentionned:-)
because once Debian is installed, you can go thru upgrades without reinstalling, as it's the case for most other distributions. And if you have to install it more than once, you'd better understand the various steps for later recovery.
I like the comparison with source based distribs, as if they were 'the challenger' to Debian. It looks like Gentoo is putting pressure! And the uPM new stuff is aimed to address it as well. Things keep moving fast!
For those who need an incentive to try Debian, the keyword is stability; their QA process is what make the distrib lag behind in terms of latest versions, but the benefit is a rock solid platform.
How can they justify such a high price, whereas for cheaper you can rent a DVD: -with a sound and image quality far superior -that you will get in less time that it takes to download it -that you may be allowed to keep longer than 24h -that you can watch on your home theater and not on your 17" computer screen
Slashdot Mirror
Woa, bell.ca is slashdotted. Time for a new meaning to 'telco-grade'!
And I wonder how they can currently protect themselves from abuse; high-speed anonymous access=spammers/hackers haven!
will it be faster than 32 bit offerings? For almost anyone out there, it's the only factor when buying a CPU: speed! Adressing >4Gb of memory is not that worries me first :)
And even whitelists are not 100% reliable: new viruses/trojans may collect emails from addressbooks and send spam with the From field altered to appear like a friend of yours (likely to be in your addressbook..). Now even your friends will spam you! (or so it will seem).
As long as there's no M(ail)T(ransport)P(rotocol) which get rid of the overly S(implistic), without true authentication of the sender, we will get spam because email is public in the first place.
Maybe something like email cookies would be a first step in trying to establish a pseudo-authentication system.
Well, I own an All-in-Wonder Radeon. It's not _that_ old (300USD a couple years ago), and it's unsupported by their unified driver! And I don't even talk about the multimedia features, TV in-out, which are mostly broken in Gatos tools/drivers and non existent in their own driver.
I'm back on Win2k for the time being, partly because of this. And I wonder if my next purchase will be ATI, based on my current experience. Sad, because the hardware is rock-solid!
If what's inside is to be taken as facts, it's interesting to see that in a large scale environment:
-IIS management is not easy (due to the metabase, and reloading their custom ISAPI module required an additionnal layer to do it without iisreset)
-there's actually no equivalents for rdist, cron, syslog. They ported them to win32.
-they had to hack the net driver to change MTU on the fly
More important to me: they had an hard time figuring out stuff because of the lack of documentation and all undocumented interfaces. They even didn't suspected all the CLI facilities of Win2000 (nor do I).
So, W2K Server is powerful, yet it's setup in a bloated way making it difficult to manage. I wish some good papers would be written on the subject for all of us stuck with administring such boxes to benefit of other's experiences.
Apparently, klecker.debian.org (194.109.137.218) is now hosting security.debian.org (as seen in NS updates propagating).
Nothing beats unices at servers tasks. Go figure what's wrong with a NT/2000 box! For the userland GUI, Windows is the thing since it's been designed for users, and PCs are build with MS in mind.
I know nobody will get to read this post, but I thought I could add to up this story in the hall of fame =)
Another reason could be that Taco doesn't read other's stories and didn't see that the previous one was MS as well. Regarding free advertising, I don't think any more coverage could do anything to a buyer's decision. If you're willing to pay, you will anyway, and ditto if you don't.
The better solution is to get rid of the bastardization (PPOE) .
:-)
You obviously don't have to manage an ISP.. PPPoE allows a much greater control than PVC based, with:
-session accounting
-flexible user login control (radius, realms and so on)
You don't need to reconfig a router manually for each customer, play with MAC addresses etc.
By the way, most PPPoE have an MTU set for 1492. But since most ISPs are using a telco platform and the sessions are forwarded over L2TP to their router, there's another 40 bytes to remove from the 1492.. The ideal MTU now being 1452 for PPPoE customers. If all clients had this set, nobody would have heard of MTU/MSS at all
I think it's utopic to think one can fix so many's ISPs problems. It's like closing open relays, even with big real-time blocking lists, a lot still slip thru.
A good paper explaining MTU/MSS is on Cisco. If your ISP can't just 'adjust-mss' on his router, either he will fragment a lot and drop the DF (don't fragment) packets, or you will have to use Dr TCP to fix the MTU on your side.
..a game is hardly the result of producers/developers; it's like humor, you can't have a recipe that works 100% for everybody. When there was passion and a few core geeks that developped games for themselves, the result had to be convincing. Now, with Hollywood budgets, planning, CG and all, how do you want a game to remain fun? Proof is, a lot of people still enjoy playing NES :-) As far as I'm concerned, "keep it simple".
I can't see how this is newsworthy, it's already in your /usr/share/doc/alsa-source/README.Debian.gz. And they use the far simpler make-kpkg instead of building manually with lengthy vars to define that nobody remembers. ;-)
Ok, the big news was indeed: use apt-get install alsa-source and read the manual to get alsa to work on Debian
Being a sysadmin myself, I wonder how you'll proceed:
-put down the current slashdot
-push the DB as fast as possible to the new facilities (or they were already mirrored in real time?)
-switch the dns record
Does that sound right?
Do you mean that you're able to tell the difference between east and west coast based sites just by judging their speed? I don't think so! 60ms added latency won't make the slightest difference, and I'd even say that slashdot servers being integrated to the main OSDN server farm will get better care and will run smoother.
.. can you add some more power to wherever it's currently lacking? I found /. to be less responsive as of lately. Maybe you can merge both older and newer hardware to double the overall capacity? ;)
Btw, something tells me brak is not ready for prime time..
It proved to be yet another nice illustration of politics efficiency; they do nothing for their users (consumers, they think), but they manage to obfuscate anything related to them, to be sure that they can grab a big amount of cash and still look legitimate.
Now that we got the long awaited new TLDs, what are the next key thing they're waiting to screwup?
See BGPExpert AntiDOS paper.
Why would routing to Null0 be more cpu intensive than to a physical interface? I guess some kind of hardware Null0 device could be emulated, if it becomes an issue.
It looks like uruklink.net is still vulnerable:
-port 110 is opened
-it reveals they're running Ipswitch IMail 7.07
-this software has a known overflow and exploit on the web client side
-http://mail.uruklink.net:8383/ is opened.
What are their sysadmin waiting to shut down 110/8383? Wake up!
Side note, it's funny to see that they are running an american OS and mail software..
Can this source code be subjected to DMCA?
Can its author be sued for reverse engineering?
Is it planned that DRM features will be added at some point, or the above applies..
Here is a poem that illustrate the limitations of a computerized brain:
No program can say what another will do.
Now, I won't just assert that, I'll prove it to you:
I will prove that although you might work til you drop,
you can't predict whether a program will stop.
Imagine we have a procedure called P
that will snoop in the source code of programs to see
there aren't infinite loops that go round and around;
and P prints the word "Fine!" if no looping is found.
You feed in your code, and the input it needs,
and then P takes them both and it studies and reads
and computes whether things will all end as the should
(as opposed to going loopy the way that they could).
Well, the truth is that P cannot possibly be,
because if you wrote it and gave it to me,
I could use it to set up a logical bind
that would shatter your reason and scramble your mind.
Here's the trick I would use - and it's simple to do.
I'd define a procedure - we'll name the thing Q -
that would take and program and call P (of course!)
to tell if it looped, by reading the source;
And if so, Q would simply print "Loop!" and then stop;
but if no, Q would go right back to the top,
and start off again, looping endlessly back,
til the universe dies and is frozen and black.
And this program called Q wouldn't stay on the shelf;
I would run it, and (fiendishly) feed it itself.
What behaviour results when I do this with Q?
When it reads its own source, just what will it do?
If P warns of loops, Q will print "Loop!" and quit;
yet P is supposed to speak truly of it.
So if Q's going to quit, then P should say, "Fine!" -
which will make Q go back to its very first line!
No matter what P would have done, Q will scoop it:
Q uses P's output to make P look stupid.
If P gets things right then it lies in its tooth;
and if it speaks falsely, it's telling the truth!
I've created a paradox, neat as can be -
and simply by using your putative P.
When you assumed P you stepped into a snare;
Your assumptions have led you right into my lair.
So, how to escape from this logical mess?
I don't have to tell you; I'm sure you can guess.
By reductio, there cannot possibly be
a procedure that acts like the mythical P.
You can never discover mechanical means
for predicting the acts of computing machines.
It's something that cannot be done. So we users
must find our own bugs; our computers are losers!
by Geoffrey K. Pullum
Stevenson College
University of California
USB devices are PnP, given that USB service itself is installed/configured. And on Debian, load those modules: /etc/modules and running /etc/init.d/modutils, and you'll be set. The remaining step is to actually plug the thing in the port, as you mentionned :-)
input
mousedev
hid
usbcore
usb-uhci
buy putting them in
because once Debian is installed, you can go thru upgrades without reinstalling, as it's the case for most other distributions. And if you have to install it more than once, you'd better understand the various steps for later recovery.
I like the comparison with source based distribs, as if they were 'the challenger' to Debian. It looks like Gentoo is putting pressure! And the uPM new stuff is aimed to address it as well. Things keep moving fast!
For those who need an incentive to try Debian, the keyword is stability; their QA process is what make the distrib lag behind in terms of latest versions, but the benefit is a rock solid platform.
How can they justify such a high price, whereas for cheaper you can rent a DVD:
-with a sound and image quality far superior
-that you will get in less time that it takes to download it
-that you may be allowed to keep longer than 24h
-that you can watch on your home theater and not on your 17" computer screen
Do they have customers for this service at all?
If it sounds that bad, RIAA will use it to test-bed P2P and prove that it can't work ;)