No one is calling for this congressman to be censored - If anything, his retarded comments have intentionally broadcast so that more people can understand how stupid they are. His comments have already been addressed over and over, and it happened long before he even said anything. Any of the books from Dawkins should be enough to answer any questions he raises. All that's really left is some ridicule.
Virtualization is pretty easy in practice. Understanding the theory behind virtualization is what tends to separate the men from the boys. Management of larger virtualization infrastructures, storage, etc... Also tend to be pain points.
I've personally worked with KVM, Xen, and various VMWare products. My usually recommendation is to start with the free version of ESXi available for download from VMWare's website. Although ESXi alone lacks a few core features (you need Vsphere for live migrations, right-click cloning, DRS and a bunch of other things) it does introduce a lot of the core concepts in ways that are fairly easy to wrap your head around.
Understanding how to do the following things are a good start: - Use over-commitment to make better use of available resources. - Set reservations, resource pools, and shares to keep critical systems humming along when someone in the engineering department decides to write a fork bomb on a dev machine. - Live re-size disks. - Manage virtual switches & virtual networking. - Optimize virtual guests to run under a hypervisor - Learn about ballooning, swapping, page sharing, etc. - Learn how to monitor VMs, and debug disk/network/cpu/memory issues using command-line utilities, such as esxtop.
In general, ESXi is a great way to setup a virtual lab. I usually create a pair of virtual switches; one attached to my ethernet interface, one strictly external, and I route between them using a dual homed firewall distro, such as ZeroShell. This is a great environment for playing with DHCP, and other stuff that could break your home network.
For what it's worth, being a good Virtualization admin usually also means being a good storage admin. If you can get your hands on the netapp simulator, it's absolutely worth playing with.
Finally, knowing how to mess with ESXi does not make you a good Virtualization Admin. Read some books. Mastering Vsphere 5 by Scott Lowe is a good start. It covers everything you need to know about VMWare, and hits on storage and networking as well.
Finally, while ESXi is a great tool for corporate use and to learn virtualization theory, I strongly recommend gaining some experience with KVM. If you know what you're doing, KVM is much more powerful than the stand alone ESXi product. It's great for small businesses, or business that are banking on open source infrastructure, since it isn't artifically neutered the way standalone ESXi is, and doesn't have major licensing costs (unless you insist on RedHat Enterprise Virtualization.) If you need something with enterprise management capabilities and don't mind deploying bleeding edge code, the upstream project for RHEV is available on Fedora. Checkout the oVirt project - they are doing some very cool stuff.
The issue for many novice riders is in their ability to judge entry speed for a corner, and set a line. There are a couple of common issues that come up...
Entry speed is too fast. The novice rider feels confident approaching the corner, but as they begin to turn-in, they have an 'oh shit' moment, panic, grab the brakes, or turn in too early.
Turn in point is too soon. This is a common mistake, that comes out of panic. The rider or driver tries to cheat by turning into the corner earlier than they should. This forces an early apex, and forces the rider to correct after the apex, or risk running off the edge of the road.
Some riders do think in terms of gears, but most of the racers I know don't. Motorcycle transmissions are sequential, so I generally think in terms of how many down-shifts we need to make while entering any particular corner. We use beginning and end of brake markers, as well as multiple reference points through a turn and speed judgement to try to set entry speed, and control our lines.
Your information is good though. you seem to do some performance driving.
Data analysis is not a cheat or an aim-bot. I say this as someone who races motorcycles: I wish more people would use data analyzers - they'd be better, faster, safer riders.
Different sanctioning bodies set different rules for what is allowed, and what isn't allowed in each racing class. In general, most racing organizations now permit traction control, ABS, and launch control, although in production classes there is often a restriction that the bike must have come originally equipped with those features.
Cheating at the club level most often comes in the form of illegal modifications, and usually qualifies as blatant cheating. For example, last year someone was caught running a GSX-R 750 engine in a GSX-R 600 chassis in a 600cc class. It's not terribly uncommon to see production bikes subtly modified in ways that aren't permitted by the rules. Sometimes cheating comes in the form of unintended violation of the rules - a while back, we had a major championship decided by an illegal brake fluid cover.
I am actually a motorcycle racer. First thing: Apps like this have been around for years, and hardware to accomplish the same thing has been around for even longer. This appears to be more or less a slashvertisment.
To address a couple of points above: I don't really see apps like this being a safety issue. Very few street riders use data-loggers or lap timers. While lap timers may encourage risk taking, data loggers almost certainly wont. The use to us for data-loggers is to establish strategy, and analyze riding technique. It's useful as a teaching tool to identify bad riding habits (mid-line corrections, over-braking, etc.) It's great for comparing two different approaches to a corner to identify which is faster. Data loggers are very useful on a closed circuit where you can easily take the same corner a dozen times over a two hour period. Few street riders will pay that much attention to a single corner*, and the data is rarely useful because of changing road conditions.
The additional weight of a smart-phone or full data logging system is pretty much irrelevant at most levels of racing. The value of the data obtained far exceeds the cost of the weight. Many of us also mount cameras (Go Pro, Countour, etc.) which also add aerodynamic drag and weight.
Using a datalogger in traffic is pointless. The traffic it's self adds too many variables to make the data meaningful.
Finally, no one uses a data logger to 'turn sharper.' On a motorcycle, turning radius is usually limited by rider confidence first, and cornering clearance second. It can be increased with training and proper technique. If there was an app that said "you could probably lean further" then yes, such an app would be dangerous. Modern bikes however, already come with such a feature (peg feelers.)
* On a given weekend, you'll find me walking around any track I ride, looking at surface irregularities, camber angle, analyzing lines, etc. We pay huge attention to each corner.
When Obama took office, the deficit was over $1 trillion. Go talk to any economist and he will tell you that during a recession you should NEITHER reduce spending nor raise taxes. Otherwise you risk making things worse.
Just a point: The top 5% of this country are most certainly not in a recession.
You miss an obvious problem... Modern race cars don't accelerate, corner, or brake anywhere near the limits of human endurance. Why? Those pesky physics get in the way. It's hard to make a car accelerate at 50G. Top fuel drag racers don't achieve anything near that kind of acceleration, and accelerating is pretty much all they can do.
If you want to talk about aircraft or rockets, that's a different matter.
(FWIW, you could probably make a self driving car much lighter than a human powered car by eliminating all those pesky creature comforts, such as seats and controls.)
War. War never changes. The Romans waged war to gather slaves and wealth. Spain built an empire from its lust for gold and territory. Hitler shaped a battered Germany into an economic superpower.
But war never changes.
In the 21st century, war was still waged over the resources that could be acquired. Only this time, the spoils of war were also its weapons: patents and licensing agreements. For these resources, Apple would invade Alaska, Microsoft would annex Canada, and Samsung would dissolve into quarreling, bickering nation-states, bent on controlling the last remaining resources on Earth.:)
In 2011, the Romneys donated about 29% of their income to charity – $4 million out of their total $13.7 million in income. For 2010, they donated about 13.8% of their income, $2.98 million out of $21.6 million. Over a 20-year period, the Romneys gave to charity an average of 13.45% of their adjusted gross income, according to an accountants’ letter they provided on Friday. -- Romney’s Taxes: A Window Into Charitable Giving
Would you care to break down how much of that donation goes to the Church of Latter Day Saints? (If it helps, the tithe is supposed to be 10% of income...)
This from a country where I can't see tits on youtube. Face it, pushing your religious beliefs on other people is par the course and totally acceptable to this country so long as it's the popular set of beliefs being pushed.
For pornography to be legal, the person paying for the sex must not be engaging in sex.
If I, the director, pay two people to have sex and video tape it, it is not prostitution. If I the director, pay someone to have sex with me and I tape it, it is prostitution. If I the director do not pay someone to have sex with me, and I tape it, it is not prostitution. If someone else pays an actor to have sex while I video tape it, it is not prostitution.
If your pushing code the production once a day, you have no QA cycle whatsoever. For a larger infrastructure, there's nothing wrong with extended release cycles.
Daily releases should be for break fix only. Weekly or bi-weekly pushes to stage and test environments are pretty normal. For a full release cycle, monthly is about the fastest I'd expect, and it's not unusual to see quarterly or longer on stable infrastructure.
AOL only went unlimited when the internet became more important than AOL's content, and an assload of competitive dial-up providers sprung up all offering unlimited access.
As a consultant, I've had the opportunity to see a lot of different environments over the past 10 year or so. Here are the things that stand out to me the most:
First and foremost, get your shit together. No amount of workplace benefits will make up for a dysfunctional working environment. You can offer the worlds best benefits, but if people are stressed out at work, and constantly beating their heads against the wall to get things done, they aren't going to want to work there.
That will tend to attract people:
1. Competitive salary, and benefits. This is basic. You may have a fully stocked snack bar, but ultimately, people want work to support the rest of their lives. Fun environment, cheap wages works great for the people who are new to the industry. Vets are probably more interested in a competitive employment package.
2. Growth opportunities. Promoting from within, offering opportunities to people who have the passion and talent, but perhaps not every bullet point on the job listing, is a good way to get up and coming talent in the door. If someone thinks that your company will take their career the way they want it to go, they are much more likely to want to work with you.
3. Training opportunities. Certifications, etc. can be time consuming and expensive. A good educational program is a great way to keep people at the company, and also to upskill your employees. This is a great selling point.
4. Opportunities to pursue ideas. Having a lab, or equipment dedicated to trying new stuff is also a good way to attract and maintain talent. Anyone who has passion has a technology they want to get their hands on. Virtualization makes offering this easy. Giving people the opportunity to sell and prove their ideas is huge.
Yes, time shouldn't be the only factor, but most cryptography has a time element
To be fair, pretty much all cryptogrophy has a time/memory element. This element is the main limitation on brute force attack.
The point of cryptogrophy is to make it more time consuming/expensive to brute force the key-space than to try to brute guess the contents of the hash. The difficulty of breaking modern cryptography is typically described in terms of astronomic scales (to brute force this cypher, you'd need a bit of memory for every atom in the solar system.)
Attacks against cryptogrophy usually involve finding "short cuts," which reduce the time to attack a given cipher. The birthday attack is one very well known approach that most (all?) hash algorithms are vulnerable to.
The only perfect unbreakable encryption I'm aware of is the one time pad, and that only works if you observe proper key management.
That's one way to use salt. Another way is to keep the salt secret. A secret salt for example, can be used to validate that a value you've handed to someone else hasn't changed.
Let's use this example...
I send you a session ID, uniquely identifying you. This session ID is tied to your username, and is involved in access control. If I simply send you the ID and trust the ID you return, you could easily change it, and possibly hijack someone else's session.
If I send you the session ID, and a salted hash of the ID (but I don't send you the salt), I can validate that you haven't changed your session ID, by requiring that you return both the session ID and the hash. I'll simply re-hash the ID with the salt, and confirm that it matches the hash you send me.
This can be used as a form of input validation for pretty much anything.
Agreed, salted hashes are very valuable even when the salt is available. Salted hashes break rainbow tables, and make it difficult to identify users with the same password.
Slashdot Mirror
No one is calling for this congressman to be censored - If anything, his retarded comments have intentionally broadcast so that more people can understand how stupid they are. His comments have already been addressed over and over, and it happened long before he even said anything. Any of the books from Dawkins should be enough to answer any questions he raises. All that's really left is some ridicule.
Virtualization is pretty easy in practice. Understanding the theory behind virtualization is what tends to separate the men from the boys. Management of larger virtualization infrastructures, storage, etc... Also tend to be pain points.
I've personally worked with KVM, Xen, and various VMWare products. My usually recommendation is to start with the free version of ESXi available for download from VMWare's website. Although ESXi alone lacks a few core features (you need Vsphere for live migrations, right-click cloning, DRS and a bunch of other things) it does introduce a lot of the core concepts in ways that are fairly easy to wrap your head around.
Understanding how to do the following things are a good start:
- Use over-commitment to make better use of available resources.
- Set reservations, resource pools, and shares to keep critical systems humming along when someone in the engineering department decides to write a fork bomb on a dev machine.
- Live re-size disks.
- Manage virtual switches & virtual networking.
- Optimize virtual guests to run under a hypervisor
- Learn about ballooning, swapping, page sharing, etc.
- Learn how to monitor VMs, and debug disk/network/cpu/memory issues using command-line utilities, such as esxtop.
In general, ESXi is a great way to setup a virtual lab. I usually create a pair of virtual switches; one attached to my ethernet interface, one strictly external, and I route between them using a dual homed firewall distro, such as ZeroShell. This is a great environment for playing with DHCP, and other stuff that could break your home network.
For what it's worth, being a good Virtualization admin usually also means being a good storage admin. If you can get your hands on the netapp simulator, it's absolutely worth playing with.
Finally, knowing how to mess with ESXi does not make you a good Virtualization Admin. Read some books. Mastering Vsphere 5 by Scott Lowe is a good start. It covers everything you need to know about VMWare, and hits on storage and networking as well.
Finally, while ESXi is a great tool for corporate use and to learn virtualization theory, I strongly recommend gaining some experience with KVM. If you know what you're doing, KVM is much more powerful than the stand alone ESXi product. It's great for small businesses, or business that are banking on open source infrastructure, since it isn't artifically neutered the way standalone ESXi is, and doesn't have major licensing costs (unless you insist on RedHat Enterprise Virtualization.) If you need something with enterprise management capabilities and don't mind deploying bleeding edge code, the upstream project for RHEV is available on Fedora. Checkout the oVirt project - they are doing some very cool stuff.
The issue for many novice riders is in their ability to judge entry speed for a corner, and set a line. There are a couple of common issues that come up...
Entry speed is too fast. The novice rider feels confident approaching the corner, but as they begin to turn-in, they have an 'oh shit' moment, panic, grab the brakes, or turn in too early.
Turn in point is too soon. This is a common mistake, that comes out of panic. The rider or driver tries to cheat by turning into the corner earlier than they should. This forces an early apex, and forces the rider to correct after the apex, or risk running off the edge of the road.
Some riders do think in terms of gears, but most of the racers I know don't. Motorcycle transmissions are sequential, so I generally think in terms of how many down-shifts we need to make while entering any particular corner. We use beginning and end of brake markers, as well as multiple reference points through a turn and speed judgement to try to set entry speed, and control our lines.
Your information is good though. you seem to do some performance driving.
Data analysis is not a cheat or an aim-bot. I say this as someone who races motorcycles: I wish more people would use data analyzers - they'd be better, faster, safer riders.
Different sanctioning bodies set different rules for what is allowed, and what isn't allowed in each racing class. In general, most racing organizations now permit traction control, ABS, and launch control, although in production classes there is often a restriction that the bike must have come originally equipped with those features.
Cheating at the club level most often comes in the form of illegal modifications, and usually qualifies as blatant cheating. For example, last year someone was caught running a GSX-R 750 engine in a GSX-R 600 chassis in a 600cc class. It's not terribly uncommon to see production bikes subtly modified in ways that aren't permitted by the rules. Sometimes cheating comes in the form of unintended violation of the rules - a while back, we had a major championship decided by an illegal brake fluid cover.
I am actually a motorcycle racer. First thing: Apps like this have been around for years, and hardware to accomplish the same thing has been around for even longer. This appears to be more or less a slashvertisment.
To address a couple of points above: I don't really see apps like this being a safety issue. Very few street riders use data-loggers or lap timers. While lap timers may encourage risk taking, data loggers almost certainly wont. The use to us for data-loggers is to establish strategy, and analyze riding technique. It's useful as a teaching tool to identify bad riding habits (mid-line corrections, over-braking, etc.) It's great for comparing two different approaches to a corner to identify which is faster. Data loggers are very useful on a closed circuit where you can easily take the same corner a dozen times over a two hour period. Few street riders will pay that much attention to a single corner*, and the data is rarely useful because of changing road conditions.
The additional weight of a smart-phone or full data logging system is pretty much irrelevant at most levels of racing. The value of the data obtained far exceeds the cost of the weight. Many of us also mount cameras (Go Pro, Countour, etc.) which also add aerodynamic drag and weight.
Using a datalogger in traffic is pointless. The traffic it's self adds too many variables to make the data meaningful.
Finally, no one uses a data logger to 'turn sharper.' On a motorcycle, turning radius is usually limited by rider confidence first, and cornering clearance second. It can be increased with training and proper technique. If there was an app that said "you could probably lean further" then yes, such an app would be dangerous. Modern bikes however, already come with such a feature (peg feelers.)
* On a given weekend, you'll find me walking around any track I ride, looking at surface irregularities, camber angle, analyzing lines, etc. We pay huge attention to each corner.
Just a point: The top 5% of this country are most certainly not in a recession.
F1 cars are closer to inverted aircraft than cars anyhow, but fair point. :)
Turn left
Turn left
Turn left
Kill all humans
Turn left
No no no no no... Thunder hill is a road course, not a Nascar circuit. It turns left AND right.
You miss an obvious problem... Modern race cars don't accelerate, corner, or brake anywhere near the limits of human endurance. Why? Those pesky physics get in the way. It's hard to make a car accelerate at 50G. Top fuel drag racers don't achieve anything near that kind of acceleration, and accelerating is pretty much all they can do.
If you want to talk about aircraft or rockets, that's a different matter.
(FWIW, you could probably make a self driving car much lighter than a human powered car by eliminating all those pesky creature comforts, such as seats and controls.)
War. War never changes.
The Romans waged war to gather slaves and wealth. Spain built an empire from its lust for gold and territory. Hitler shaped a battered Germany into an economic superpower.
But war never changes.
In the 21st century, war was still waged over the resources that could be acquired. Only this time, the spoils of war were also its weapons: patents and licensing agreements. For these resources, Apple would invade Alaska, Microsoft would annex Canada, and Samsung would dissolve into quarreling, bickering nation-states, bent on controlling the last remaining resources on Earth. :)
Would you care to break down how much of that donation goes to the Church of Latter Day Saints? (If it helps, the tithe is supposed to be 10% of income...)
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/politics/54943992-90/campaign-charitable-church-income.html.csp
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_v._Freeman
Technically, I was mistaken. It is legal for the director to partake in the sex, so long as he or she isn't doing it for pleasure.
This from a country where I can't see tits on youtube. Face it, pushing your religious beliefs on other people is par the course and totally acceptable to this country so long as it's the popular set of beliefs being pushed.
It would not.
For pornography to be legal, the person paying for the sex must not be engaging in sex.
If I, the director, pay two people to have sex and video tape it, it is not prostitution.
If I the director, pay someone to have sex with me and I tape it, it is prostitution.
If I the director do not pay someone to have sex with me, and I tape it, it is not prostitution.
If someone else pays an actor to have sex while I video tape it, it is not prostitution.
Think of it as a loophole in the law.
If your pushing code the production once a day, you have no QA cycle whatsoever. For a larger infrastructure, there's nothing wrong with extended release cycles.
Daily releases should be for break fix only. Weekly or bi-weekly pushes to stage and test environments are pretty normal. For a full release cycle, monthly is about the fastest I'd expect, and it's not unusual to see quarterly or longer on stable infrastructure.
Proof that many of today's scientists are from the MTV generation:
"Ooooh! Shiny thing!" :)
I'll see your libritarian news-source and raise you a wikipedia article.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_D._Rockefeller
Doesn't seem like a terrible guy, but is by no means the free-maket saint you make him out to be, either.
http://xkcd.com/154/
AOL only went unlimited when the internet became more important than AOL's content, and an assload of competitive dial-up providers sprung up all offering unlimited access.
Why? Are you suggesting that the scientific studies are suddenly somehow not living up to standards of repeatability and peer-review?
We already have ways of dealing with these issues...
As a consultant, I've had the opportunity to see a lot of different environments over the past 10 year or so. Here are the things that stand out to me the most:
First and foremost, get your shit together. No amount of workplace benefits will make up for a dysfunctional working environment. You can offer the worlds best benefits, but if people are stressed out at work, and constantly beating their heads against the wall to get things done, they aren't going to want to work there.
That will tend to attract people:
1. Competitive salary, and benefits. This is basic. You may have a fully stocked snack bar, but ultimately, people want work to support the rest of their lives. Fun environment, cheap wages works great for the people who are new to the industry. Vets are probably more interested in a competitive employment package.
2. Growth opportunities. Promoting from within, offering opportunities to people who have the passion and talent, but perhaps not every bullet point on the job listing, is a good way to get up and coming talent in the door. If someone thinks that your company will take their career the way they want it to go, they are much more likely to want to work with you.
3. Training opportunities. Certifications, etc. can be time consuming and expensive. A good educational program is a great way to keep people at the company, and also to upskill your employees. This is a great selling point.
4. Opportunities to pursue ideas. Having a lab, or equipment dedicated to trying new stuff is also a good way to attract and maintain talent. Anyone who has passion has a technology they want to get their hands on. Virtualization makes offering this easy. Giving people the opportunity to sell and prove their ideas is huge.
Linux has improved significantly in this department as well. I have a tendency to use Ubuntu at work, and Windows XP on my home systems.
I haven't had to edit a .conf file on ubuntu in a long while.
To be fair, pretty much all cryptogrophy has a time/memory element. This element is the main limitation on brute force attack.
The point of cryptogrophy is to make it more time consuming/expensive to brute force the key-space than to try to brute guess the contents of the hash. The difficulty of breaking modern cryptography is typically described in terms of astronomic scales (to brute force this cypher, you'd need a bit of memory for every atom in the solar system.)
Attacks against cryptogrophy usually involve finding "short cuts," which reduce the time to attack a given cipher. The birthday attack is one very well known approach that most (all?) hash algorithms are vulnerable to.
The only perfect unbreakable encryption I'm aware of is the one time pad, and that only works if you observe proper key management.
That's one way to use salt. Another way is to keep the salt secret. A secret salt for example, can be used to validate that a value you've handed to someone else hasn't changed.
Let's use this example...
I send you a session ID, uniquely identifying you. This session ID is tied to your username, and is involved in access control. If I simply send you the ID and trust the ID you return, you could easily change it, and possibly hijack someone else's session.
If I send you the session ID, and a salted hash of the ID (but I don't send you the salt), I can validate that you haven't changed your session ID, by requiring that you return both the session ID and the hash. I'll simply re-hash the ID with the salt, and confirm that it matches the hash you send me.
This can be used as a form of input validation for pretty much anything.
Agreed, salted hashes are very valuable even when the salt is available. Salted hashes break rainbow tables, and make it difficult to identify users with the same password.