In my (admittedly geek) household, every adult has:
- a desktop
- a fullsize laptop
- a portable computing device (netbook, iPhone, etc.)
The desktop is for the things that the laptop can't do. The portable device is more portable than the laptop. As laptops get better, so do desktops, so they tend to leapfrog each other.
Because I've yet to see a 13" latitude w/ > 1600 horizontal resolution. I do, however, have a 1680x1050 screen in my thinkpad. However, it's more convenient to carry a netbook the random places which I visit.
I have a slightly different take on this - I view them as two different applications.
A netbook is a light, portable computing device for doing email and web whilst on the road. I do very little else with it.
My laptop is so that I have enough screen resolution, disk space and CPU horsepower to run VMs and do development while sitting on the couch or on a client site.
My desktop is for when I need even more resolution, CPU horsepower, or memory than my laptop can provide. That said, I mainly use it for storage, and am actually going to be moving the services it provides to the household (CUPS, Trac) to a desktop atom board, and then it will spend most of its time asleep. I'll WOL it when I need it (either from the Trac server or my laptop), and possibly have the BIOS start it up at midnight to download podcasts, and then let it go back to sleep when idle for too long.
My wife and I are both software engineers. We live in a nice house on 5 acres in a rural area. This means that fire and EMS response is about 10 minutes (because we have fire and ems in town), and police response is about 20 minutes (because all we have is a county sheriff (far) and state police (farther)).
We have smoke detectors, fire extinguishers, a chemifex chimney fire suppressor stick and a hose. We have first aid kits, plus all the household goods which can be pressed into service if necessary (old linens, etc.) We have a variety of household firearms suitable for all manner of varmints, both large and small.
I don't see what the difference amongst all of these things is. They are all part and parcel for self-sufficiency and dealing with the realities of where we live.
I was sorting range pickup brass one day while watching a movie with my wife, and came across a 9mm. My wife exclaimed "what the heck is that?". I told her that it was a 9mm. Her: And cops actually shoot that at people and expect it to do something? Me: Yep. Her: I think I'll stick with the.45.
+1. From experiences from back in my volunteer firefighter days, I can go from fully asleep to fully alert and pulling on my trousers in about two seconds. Then again, I've always been a light sleeper.
That said, I already DO enter a pin when I need access to my bedstand gun, as it is secured by a lockbox. However, *I* chose the method of securing my weapon, not some idiot congresscritter.
You miss one point - many Linux users don't really care if Linux competes with Windows and OSX. As long as it works for us, and keeps working for us, why do I care if you run it or not?
Ted Kennedy spent most of his career attempting to subvert the constitution of these United States either directly (all control of small arms and light weapons violates the second amendment o the US constitution) or indirectly (Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac/the Public option are end-runs around the tenth amendment by making a government run private corporation to do that which the government cannot legally do).
In addition to whatever he did in his personal life, he is guilty of (at best) violation of his oath of office and (at worst) treason.
64 bit OS's don't run on 32 bit CPUs, which is most of the netbook lines. While there are a few Atom models which are 64 bit, the majority of them are 32 bit. I don't think MS wants to abandon that market to Linux, since it would allow netbooks to become a Linux "gateway drug".
I don't know about you, but when I say "listen on this interface only", and then check that it is, I'm pretty sure that it won't spontaneously start listening on other interface. Throwing a firewall over a service which doesn't listen on a given interface is kind of useless.
Now, if you're talking something like "allow from 192.168.0.0/24" having a hole in it, you're right. Such a rule implemented at the service level + at the firewall level does help protect against a bug in either, giving you an element of defense in depth.
Problem is, most folks just throw up the firewall, which means that you're back down to one point of failure. Now, you can argue that the firewall is simpler, more thoroughly vetted, etc, and you have a point.
But, your point is well taken. I think we can agree on: - Defense in depth is good. - Having a firewall is no substitute for hardening machines.
So then you've pretty much proven my original point - firewalls are of marginal usefulness. You need to harden machines and be careful in your use of them. If you can't, you're pretty much done.:-)
Thank you. It's about time someone else realized this.
Firewalls are good for: - Helping to limit access to services which don't have built in access limits (think tcp-wrappers++) - Helping to protect a pile of machines over which you have little to no control (a bunch of desktops in the office, for example).
When talking about servers, if you sufficiently harden your machine, a firewall does very little, especially if the service being compromised is one which the firewall allows pretty much anyone access to...
For a time, I worked at the subcontractor who manufactured the printers for Digimarc for their Missouri program. We customized the driver and firmware such that each printer had an "unlock code" individually keyed to each printer - basically a one way (computer->printer) public/private key encryption. The computer would get the public key, encrypt a "hello there" type message, and the printer would decrypt it with the private key. If you fail to encrypt it, nothing happens. If you encrypt it with the wrong key, nothing happens. So, it was implicitly tied to that workstation. If you can't get into that workstation, you can't print. If you try to print it on another machine, it doesn't work, even if you have the driver.
Now, you can always get the private key from the workstation, but we counted on the solution provider to secure the workstation, which it looks like they did in this case.
For what it's worth, my old gaming group has been having fun with Flames of War, and I've been looking at the Modern FOW. Furthermore, since the basic unit is a squad mounted on a base (rather than individuals), it means that you don't have to play it at 15mm scale - it works just as well at 6mm scale (1:285/1:300/aka microarmor), which means that you can field a whole battlegroup for about 1/3rd the cost, and just leave the ranges the same - it makes the ranges closer to actual scale anyway (considering a 1:285 M1 Abrams can fire something like 700 inches, letting it shoot 48 is a lot closer than a 1:72nd scale tank which can only shoot 48 inches).
The hard part is finding people who play FOW and do it without the proper minis, but instead use the rules for Micro. That said, there are lots of Micro players, and you'd have more luck convincing them to play with these alternate rules.
Re:Did he play it for more than 5 minutes?
on
Black Review
·
· Score: 1
No one said that they are copper jacketed lead. Indeed, with an AK used by terrorists, they're likely Wolf, which is (if I remember) a steel-washed copper jacket, and they do spark sometimes when they hit the backstop at the range.
I think US doctrine is every third round, but I'm not sure.
Besides, remember - a lot of these are being taken from terrorists, so who knows what their combat doctrine is.
Re:Did he play it for more than 5 minutes?
on
Black Review
·
· Score: 1
Of course, it ticked me off that the weapons models were wrong. Just taking the AK:
(1) I've never seen a left hand eject AK, let alone picking one up randomly. (2) Silencer? What? (3) I've never seen a 60 round box mag for an AK. 50, 75, and 100, sure, but never 60, and not as an issued thing. (4) 3 round burst AK's are pretty rare.
My review: "Piss poor save point design make this game unplayable".
(1) Bought this game when it came out. (2) Tried to return 3 hours later. (3) Went through corporate customer service to finally get the store to take it back.
Problems:
(1) Game marketed for people 17+ (M rating). Not really a problem, but.... (2) Levels are so long that some of them take almost an hour to complete - unless you die. (3) If you die, you go back to a checkpoint (level 2 has 6 of them, each one taking about 15-20 mins each). (4) However, you cannot save game at checkpoints, only between levels. (5) This means you need multiple contiguous hours in order to be able to play this game. (6) I don't know of most folks 17+ that can play games for 3+ hours straight on a regular basis. I know I can't.
Particularly when those who are much more likely to find a use for their gun are those who are going to do it in a way that is not in self-defence.
Actually, you make a good point here: in about a month and a half, I am using my handgun in a shooting competition. That is a non self-defense role, but is completely legal. I'm not doing any harm, why do you feel the need to take away the one sport I enjoy?
However, here in the US, where you can live on 30+ acres (0.1 sq km) of your own land, upon which you may legally hunt, it takes a tremendous number of game wardens to enforce that type of law. Most folks wouldn't agree to the higher taxes necessary to hire the personnel to enforce such a regime.
Slashdot Mirror
absolutely.
Yeah, I've been wanting one of these for awhile.
In my (admittedly geek) household, every adult has:
- a desktop
- a fullsize laptop
- a portable computing device (netbook, iPhone, etc.)
The desktop is for the things that the laptop can't do. The portable device is more portable than the laptop. As laptops get better, so do desktops, so they tend to leapfrog each other.
Last time I checked, Raid 1 was fault tolerant.
Because I've yet to see a 13" latitude w/ > 1600 horizontal resolution. I do, however, have a 1680x1050 screen in my thinkpad. However, it's more convenient to carry a netbook the random places which I visit.
I have a slightly different take on this - I view them as two different applications.
A netbook is a light, portable computing device for doing email and web whilst on the road. I do very little else with it.
My laptop is so that I have enough screen resolution, disk space and CPU horsepower to run VMs and do development while sitting on the couch or on a client site.
My desktop is for when I need even more resolution, CPU horsepower, or memory than my laptop can provide. That said, I mainly use it for storage, and am actually going to be moving the services it provides to the household (CUPS, Trac) to a desktop atom board, and then it will spend most of its time asleep. I'll WOL it when I need it (either from the Trac server or my laptop), and possibly have the BIOS start it up at midnight to download podcasts, and then let it go back to sleep when idle for too long.
Yeah, because the Aussies who wanted to keep guns all moved to the US.
My wife and I are both software engineers. We live in a nice house on 5 acres in a rural area. This means that fire and EMS response is about 10 minutes (because we have fire and ems in town), and police response is about 20 minutes (because all we have is a county sheriff (far) and state police (farther)).
We have smoke detectors, fire extinguishers, a chemifex chimney fire suppressor stick and a hose.
We have first aid kits, plus all the household goods which can be pressed into service if necessary (old linens, etc.)
We have a variety of household firearms suitable for all manner of varmints, both large and small.
I don't see what the difference amongst all of these things is. They are all part and parcel for self-sufficiency and dealing with the realities of where we live.
I was sorting range pickup brass one day while watching a movie with my wife, and came across a 9mm. My wife exclaimed "what the heck is that?". I told her that it was a 9mm. .45.
Her: And cops actually shoot that at people and expect it to do something?
Me: Yep.
Her: I think I'll stick with the
I love my wife.
+1. From experiences from back in my volunteer firefighter days, I can go from fully asleep to fully alert and pulling on my trousers in about two seconds. Then again, I've always been a light sleeper.
That said, I already DO enter a pin when I need access to my bedstand gun, as it is secured by a lockbox. However, *I* chose the method of securing my weapon, not some idiot congresscritter.
You miss one point - many Linux users don't really care if Linux competes with Windows and OSX. As long as it works for us, and keeps working for us, why do I care if you run it or not?
Ted Kennedy spent most of his career attempting to subvert the constitution of these United States either directly (all control of small arms and light weapons violates the second amendment o the US constitution) or indirectly (Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac/the Public option are end-runs around the tenth amendment by making a government run private corporation to do that which the government cannot legally do).
In addition to whatever he did in his personal life, he is guilty of (at best) violation of his oath of office and (at worst) treason.
Minor technical reason:
64 bit OS's don't run on 32 bit CPUs, which is most of the netbook lines. While there are a few Atom models which are 64 bit, the majority of them are 32 bit. I don't think MS wants to abandon that market to Linux, since it would allow netbooks to become a Linux "gateway drug".
I have 8GB of RAM in my new machine.
I've filled it, and gone 2GB into my swap.
You seem to think that there is a difference...
I don't know about you, but when I say "listen on this interface only", and then check that it is, I'm pretty sure that it won't spontaneously start listening on other interface. Throwing a firewall over a service which doesn't listen on a given interface is kind of useless.
Now, if you're talking something like "allow from 192.168.0.0/24" having a hole in it, you're right. Such a rule implemented at the service level + at the firewall level does help protect against a bug in either, giving you an element of defense in depth.
Problem is, most folks just throw up the firewall, which means that you're back down to one point of failure. Now, you can argue that the firewall is simpler, more thoroughly vetted, etc, and you have a point.
But, your point is well taken. I think we can agree on:
- Defense in depth is good.
- Having a firewall is no substitute for hardening machines.
So then you've pretty much proven my original point - firewalls are of marginal usefulness. You need to harden machines and be careful in your use of them. If you can't, you're pretty much done. :-)
Thank you. It's about time someone else realized this.
Firewalls are good for:
- Helping to limit access to services which don't have built in access limits (think tcp-wrappers++)
- Helping to protect a pile of machines over which you have little to no control (a bunch of desktops in the office, for example).
When talking about servers, if you sufficiently harden your machine, a firewall does very little, especially if the service being compromised is one which the firewall allows pretty much anyone access to...
Actually, he might not be as dumb as you think.
For a time, I worked at the subcontractor who manufactured the printers for Digimarc for their Missouri program. We customized the driver and firmware such that each printer had an "unlock code" individually keyed to each printer - basically a one way (computer->printer) public/private key encryption. The computer would get the public key, encrypt a "hello there" type message, and the printer would decrypt it with the private key. If you fail to encrypt it, nothing happens. If you encrypt it with the wrong key, nothing happens. So, it was implicitly tied to that workstation. If you can't get into that workstation, you can't print. If you try to print it on another machine, it doesn't work, even if you have the driver.
Now, you can always get the private key from the workstation, but we counted on the solution provider to secure the workstation, which it looks like they did in this case.
For what it's worth, my old gaming group has been having fun with Flames of War, and I've been looking at the Modern FOW. Furthermore, since the basic unit is a squad mounted on a base (rather than individuals), it means that you don't have to play it at 15mm scale - it works just as well at 6mm scale (1:285/1:300/aka microarmor), which means that you can field a whole battlegroup for about 1/3rd the cost, and just leave the ranges the same - it makes the ranges closer to actual scale anyway (considering a 1:285 M1 Abrams can fire something like 700 inches, letting it shoot 48 is a lot closer than a 1:72nd scale tank which can only shoot 48 inches).
The hard part is finding people who play FOW and do it without the proper minis, but instead use the rules for Micro. That said, there are lots of Micro players, and you'd have more luck convincing them to play with these alternate rules.
No one said that they are copper jacketed lead. Indeed, with an AK used by terrorists, they're likely Wolf, which is (if I remember) a steel-washed copper jacket, and they do spark sometimes when they hit the backstop at the range.
I think US doctrine is every third round, but I'm not sure.
Besides, remember - a lot of these are being taken from terrorists, so who knows what their combat doctrine is.
Of course, it ticked me off that the weapons models were wrong. Just taking the AK:
(1) I've never seen a left hand eject AK, let alone picking one up randomly.
(2) Silencer? What?
(3) I've never seen a 60 round box mag for an AK. 50, 75, and 100, sure, but never 60, and not as an issued thing.
(4) 3 round burst AK's are pretty rare.
Don't get me started on the other guns.
Above review is bad and stupid.
My review:
"Piss poor save point design make this game unplayable".
(1) Bought this game when it came out.
(2) Tried to return 3 hours later.
(3) Went through corporate customer service to finally get the store to take it back.
Problems:
(1) Game marketed for people 17+ (M rating). Not really a problem, but....
(2) Levels are so long that some of them take almost an hour to complete - unless you die.
(3) If you die, you go back to a checkpoint (level 2 has 6 of them, each one taking about 15-20 mins each).
(4) However, you cannot save game at checkpoints, only between levels.
(5) This means you need multiple contiguous hours in order to be able to play this game.
(6) I don't know of most folks 17+ that can play games for 3+ hours straight on a regular basis. I know I can't.
Particularly when those who are much more likely to find a use for their gun are those who are going to do it in a way that is not in self-defence.
Actually, you make a good point here: in about a month and a half, I am using my handgun in a shooting competition. That is a non self-defense role, but is completely legal. I'm not doing any harm, why do you feel the need to take away the one sport I enjoy?
However, here in the US, where you can live on 30+ acres (0.1 sq km) of your own land, upon which you may legally hunt, it takes a tremendous number of game wardens to enforce that type of law. Most folks wouldn't agree to the higher taxes necessary to hire the personnel to enforce such a regime.