I write "CHECK ID PLEASE" and I don't sign the card at all. I really don't see the point of signing the back of the card. Hardly anyone looks at the damn signature anyway, and if you sign the back or your card, a person who steals it would have your signature to try and copy for the small minority of cashiers that actually do look at it.
If a cashier actually asked me to sign my card (as another poster desribed), I would refuse and offer them my ID. If they are so obsessed with seeing my signature, they can compare the signature on my ID with the one I sign on the reciept.
I've been writing a *amp based music database for myself. To delete a record, I have to first click on 'delete' next to the record. A confirmation page then comes up asking me if I'm sure about what I'm doing. Below the confirmation message is a check box with "Yes I want to delete this record" next to it, and a submit button. The simple act of adding the checkbox makes accidentally deleting a record much harder.
"Circa 1995-2000 Quantum had the best quality, but that has gone away due to cost cutting."
I think Quantums quality went down the tube a bit before 2000. We used to buy Gateway machines here at work, and they used Quantum drives. Between 1999 and 2001 we had up to a 90% failure rate within three years with certain Quantum "Fireball" models. Fireball was an appropriate name because their chipsets would literaly explode and flames would protrude form them. On one occasion I was lucky enough to have the case open when one of them went bad. A 2 inch wide bright blue fireball came out of one of the chips on the bottom of the drive right before my eyes. It reminded me of a welding torch. If it wasn't a chipset failure it was a machanical failure. Either way the Quantums in our computers allways died.
When I heard that Maxtor had bought out Quantum, and subsequently saw a couple of new Maxtors models with chips on the bottom that said "Quantum" on them, I decided not to buy Maxtors any more.
I had use Maxtors and they sounded like turbojets when they were powered up. After hearing of Maxtor's idiotic decision to integrate Quantum technology into their products, it was time for me to choose a different brand. At work the systems we have been buying come with Seagate drives, and I have noticed that they are extremely quiet - and pretty reliable to boot.
I just bought three Seagates and now I can hear my fans instead of my drives when I fire up my computer.
"I just bought a $220 Intel processor from NewEgg, a 3.2 GHz P4. For the same price, I could have gotten a retail AMD 3400+. The P4 is faster in some tasks (such as video editing), but the 3400+ is faster in others (such as gaming). It's pretty much a toss-up."
Sure, it's a toss up until you want to run 64bit OS. If you own the afformentioned P4 3.2, you get to buy a new chip. If you own the afforementioned Athlon64 3400 you're set to go. I love how in your post, you cleverly left out the "64" part in Athlon model name.
AMD is still king in the "bang for your buck" arena.
Yeah, the text of the article seemed a tad bit biased.
The AMD64 chip beat out the Intel chip in almost EVERY benchmark, and then ZDNet goes on to praise the Intel for 'holding it's own' with the AMD64, making sure and point out the one or two benchmarks (done with Intel Optimized software) where the Intel edges out the AMD.
That's great that you keep your Windows ship running rightly. I work in IT and we have a 1200 Workstation/30+ server/5 site Windows network with a few *nix boxes here and there. We do SUS, AV, deploy apps via group policy - the whole nine yards - a model windows shop if you ask me, but that doesn't take away from the fact that most Windows admins don't know a *damn* thing about computer/network security.
Let me ask you a question...do you run your computer as a local admin at work? A domain admin? Don't lie! I bet 90% of Windows admins happily run their boxes as domain admins at work. It's just too much trouble for them to shift-click and do a "run as" (or worse, they don't even *know about* "run as") when they want to open up ADUC.
Four years ago, our Exchange 5.5 server suddenly stopped responding. I went in to take a look and it was throwing all kinds of crazy error messages that I had never seen before. I did a virus scan on it and discovered that it was infected with the Klez virus.
Every executable on the machine (thousands of them) was infected. This was our f******g first in site Exchange server for Christ's sake! After hours of researching the virus, and scanning over and over again, I managed to clean the entire server. After getting it clean, tons of executables on the system that had been 'cleaned' were corrupted. I had to reinstall exchange 5.5. It was a nightmare.
Wanna guess how out first in site Exchange 5.5 server got infected with the Klez virus? Our f******g Exchange admin installed Outlook 97 on it and was using it to test out new email accounts while logged on as a domain admin account! Unf*****gbeleivable!!!! He had like 20 drives mapped while he was doing it, and he ended up infecting 3 other servers in the process.
After that I went to our boss, and told her what happened. I demanded that she make everyone who had privledged accounts create new accounts for themselves and start logging onto their machines as regular domain user accounts. After that I felt like the geeky hall monitor everyone hated, walking around asking my coworkers - you're not logged on as an admin are you? They ALL resisted this, but finally I got them to start practicing sane computing.
I've met MANY other windows admins that are the same way. They just don't understand security. We can thank the MCSE boot camps from the 90's for this. They turned out millions of monkeys, who now run many of our nations Windows networks.
The only way Microsoft can fix this is by putting the smack down on their users, and locking things up tight by default. They also need to make thing EASIER to do for the home user. As far as ease of use goes, they need MUCH more separation between their home/pro products.
As far as locking things down, they are starting to do the right thing with with XPSP2, and Server 2003. Another thing they have done that is excellent, is revise ALL of their official curriculum to where lab exercises are done while logged on as a regular user with the "Run as" command. Hopefully the MCSE monkeys from the 90's will slowly be weeded out, and things will get better on the corporate front. I am sent to Microosft training from time to time, and the oeverall security awareness of the people I train with has *slowly* gotten better over the last couple of years.
Anyhow, just because your network is clean doesn't take away from the fact that many corporate networks aren't and even more home Windows boxes aren't.
IMO, no ports being open by default is a good as having a firewall turned on by default.
The whole "you must filter all of your ports to be secure" mantra (read: Steve Gibson) is highly overrated.
"A simple NAT is not enough. A firewall is required."
Required for what? What if you don't have any services listening on open ports?
"The best full security suites are free: linux, openbsd, etc. Run them on an old PC for your firewall/NAT. They are configurable to your heart's content, unlike cheap, buggy dlink and linksys hardware."
The last time I checked, Linksys routers ran Linux.
I run two Windows boxes behind a BSD router. To avoid the pain of having to change my natd.conf file every time I want to try a new P2P app, I simply forward large group of ports to each of my Windows boxes. Ports 5000-8999 go to one and 9009-12999 got to the other. No *Windows* services run on these ports, so I don't lose any sleep over it.
We recently deployed McAfee 8.0i in our organization. We have been satisfied with it, but one of our accessibility apps in our disabled student labs was crippled by the buffer overflow protection. We decided to just disable the buffer overflow protection accross the enterprise via EPO.
Perhaps the newer XEONs wih the huge on chip caches and faster FSBs fair better. I did another google, and every benchmark I find is rather old. I did find one newer one, but it only does a tiny set of tests on *one* platform with *one* product. THe newer benchmark does show the Intel doing better in some areas and the opteron doing better in others, but it's hard to compare it to older benchmarks because the old ones don't do these tests.
Here is the 'new' benchmark I found: http://www.anandtech.com/IT/showdoc.aspx?i =2347
Note - those aren't the benchmarks I've seen before that inlcude mysql.
Your issue appears to be that you will ony buy from a select few vendors. We buy from HP only, and their Opteron systems are cheaper than their XEON systems accross the board.
Slashdot Mirror
Brilliant!
I've been wanting something like this for Firefox for ages.
Or, at the very least, a good attention grabbing headline for a /. story. :)
"Acura is Honda's luxury brand."
I think Acura is a U.S. only brand. In Europe, the Acura NSX/Integra/Legend is called the Honda NSX/Integra/Legend.
I write "CHECK ID PLEASE" and I don't sign the card at all. I really don't see the point of signing the back of the card. Hardly anyone looks at the damn signature anyway, and if you sign the back or your card, a person who steals it would have your signature to try and copy for the small minority of cashiers that actually do look at it.
If a cashier actually asked me to sign my card (as another poster desribed), I would refuse and offer them my ID. If they are so obsessed with seeing my signature, they can compare the signature on my ID with the one I sign on the reciept.
Colic. Another one of those things that doesn't really exist.
Baby's tooth hurts - must be 'colic'
Baby's tummy hurts - must be 'colic'
Baby's got a headache - must be 'colic'
I can definitly see how Heroin would help cure 'colic'.
I've been writing a *amp based music database for myself. To delete a record, I have to first click on 'delete' next to the record. A confirmation page then comes up asking me if I'm sure about what I'm doing. Below the confirmation message is a check box with "Yes I want to delete this record" next to it, and a submit button. The simple act of adding the checkbox makes accidentally deleting a record much harder.
"If you use Freenet you can legally share anything."
So on Freenet, hosts can magically connect with eachother wihout knowing eachothers IP addresses?
Suuuuuure.
Keep on drinkin' that coolaid.
Also...I fail to see how using Freenet to share the lastest movie would somehow make it 'legal'.
"Circa 1995-2000 Quantum had the best quality, but that has gone away due to cost cutting."
I think Quantums quality went down the tube a bit before 2000. We used to buy Gateway machines here at work, and they used Quantum drives. Between 1999 and 2001 we had up to a 90% failure rate within three years with certain Quantum "Fireball" models. Fireball was an appropriate name because their chipsets would literaly explode and flames would protrude form them. On one occasion I was lucky enough to have the case open when one of them went bad. A 2 inch wide bright blue fireball came out of one of the chips on the bottom of the drive right before my eyes. It reminded me of a welding torch. If it wasn't a chipset failure it was a machanical failure. Either way the Quantums in our computers allways died.
When I heard that Maxtor had bought out Quantum, and subsequently saw a couple of new Maxtors models with chips on the bottom that said "Quantum" on them, I decided not to buy Maxtors any more.
I had use Maxtors and they sounded like turbojets when they were powered up. After hearing of Maxtor's idiotic decision to integrate Quantum technology into their products, it was time for me to choose a different brand. At work the systems we have been buying come with Seagate drives, and I have noticed that they are extremely quiet - and pretty reliable to boot.
I just bought three Seagates and now I can hear my fans instead of my drives when I fire up my computer.
Yeah. It was released on April 1st.
"I just bought a $220 Intel processor from NewEgg, a 3.2 GHz P4. For the same price, I could have gotten a retail AMD 3400+. The P4 is faster in some tasks (such as video editing), but the 3400+ is faster in others (such as gaming). It's pretty much a toss-up."
Sure, it's a toss up until you want to run 64bit OS. If you own the afformentioned P4 3.2, you get to buy a new chip. If you own the afforementioned Athlon64 3400 you're set to go. I love how in your post, you cleverly left out the "64" part in Athlon model name.
AMD is still king in the "bang for your buck" arena.
Yeah, the text of the article seemed a tad bit biased.
The AMD64 chip beat out the Intel chip in almost EVERY benchmark, and then ZDNet goes on to praise the Intel for 'holding it's own' with the AMD64, making sure and point out the one or two benchmarks (done with Intel Optimized software) where the Intel edges out the AMD.
good bit: 0x0
evil bit: 0x1
boob bit: (.)x(.)
Unlike the evil bit, the internet community might actually find a use for this one.
"unpatched client apps on a production server as a domain admin..."
:(
Running any client apps, patched or unpatched, on a server is idiotic.
"...should have their rights taken away and be demoted to junior admin."
I agree. Unfortunately, in certain corporate cultures/settings, it just doesn't work that way.
"If a tree falls in the forest and there is no port open to log the event did it really even happen?"
:)
lol. You managed to make me crack a smile there.
Lucas,
That's great that you keep your Windows ship running rightly. I work in IT and we have a 1200 Workstation/30+ server/5 site Windows network with a few *nix boxes here and there. We do SUS, AV, deploy apps via group policy - the whole nine yards - a model windows shop if you ask me, but that doesn't take away from the fact that most Windows admins don't know a *damn* thing about computer/network security.
Let me ask you a question...do you run your computer as a local admin at work? A domain admin? Don't lie! I bet 90% of Windows admins happily run their boxes as domain admins at work. It's just too much trouble for them to shift-click and do a "run as" (or worse, they don't even *know about* "run as") when they want to open up ADUC.
Four years ago, our Exchange 5.5 server suddenly stopped responding. I went in to take a look and it was throwing all kinds of crazy error messages that I had never seen before. I did a virus scan on it and discovered that it was infected with the Klez virus.
Every executable on the machine (thousands of them) was infected. This was our f******g first in site Exchange server for Christ's sake! After hours of researching the virus, and scanning over and over again, I managed to clean the entire server. After getting it clean, tons of executables on the system that had been 'cleaned' were corrupted. I had to reinstall exchange 5.5. It was a nightmare.
Wanna guess how out first in site Exchange 5.5 server got infected with the Klez virus? Our f******g Exchange admin installed Outlook 97 on it and was using it to test out new email accounts while logged on as a domain admin account! Unf*****gbeleivable!!!! He had like 20 drives mapped while he was doing it, and he ended up infecting 3 other servers in the process.
After that I went to our boss, and told her what happened. I demanded that she make everyone who had privledged accounts create new accounts for themselves and start logging onto their machines as regular domain user accounts. After that I felt like the geeky hall monitor everyone hated, walking around asking my coworkers - you're not logged on as an admin are you? They ALL resisted this, but finally I got them to start practicing sane computing.
I've met MANY other windows admins that are the same way. They just don't understand security. We can thank the MCSE boot camps from the 90's for this. They turned out millions of monkeys, who now run many of our nations Windows networks.
The only way Microsoft can fix this is by putting the smack down on their users, and locking things up tight by default. They also need to make thing EASIER to do for the home user. As far as ease of use goes, they need MUCH more separation between their home/pro products.
As far as locking things down, they are starting to do the right thing with with XPSP2, and Server 2003. Another thing they have done that is excellent, is revise ALL of their official curriculum to where lab exercises are done while logged on as a regular user with the "Run as" command. Hopefully the MCSE monkeys from the 90's will slowly be weeded out, and things will get better on the corporate front. I am sent to Microosft training from time to time, and the oeverall security awareness of the people I train with has *slowly* gotten better over the last couple of years.
Anyhow, just because your network is clean doesn't take away from the fact that many corporate networks aren't and even more home Windows boxes aren't.
IMO, no ports being open by default is a good as having a firewall turned on by default. The whole "you must filter all of your ports to be secure" mantra (read: Steve Gibson) is highly overrated.
"A simple NAT is not enough. A firewall is required."
Required for what? What if you don't have any services listening on open ports?
"The best full security suites are free: linux, openbsd, etc. Run them on an old PC for your firewall/NAT. They are configurable to your heart's content, unlike cheap, buggy dlink and linksys hardware."
The last time I checked, Linksys routers ran Linux.
I run two Windows boxes behind a BSD router. To avoid the pain of having to change my natd.conf file every time I want to try a new P2P app, I simply forward large group of ports to each of my Windows boxes. Ports 5000-8999 go to one and 9009-12999 got to the other. No *Windows* services run on these ports, so I don't lose any sleep over it.
I wouldn't say they get a "pass", but lets just be thankfull that Microsft finally got it right by turning the damn firewall on by default with SP2.
Excuse my ignorance about Macs, but does OSX 10.2 come with a firewall turned on by default?
We recently deployed McAfee 8.0i in our organization. We have been satisfied with it, but one of our accessibility apps in our disabled student labs was crippled by the buffer overflow protection. We decided to just disable the buffer overflow protection accross the enterprise via EPO.
Sorry...I wasn't looking too hard.
i =2347
:)
Perhaps the newer XEONs wih the huge on chip caches and faster FSBs fair better. I did another google, and every benchmark I find is rather old. I did find one newer one, but it only does a tiny set of tests on *one* platform with *one* product. THe newer benchmark does show the Intel doing better in some areas and the opteron doing better in others, but it's hard to compare it to older benchmarks because the old ones don't do these tests.
Here is the 'new' benchmark I found:
http://www.anandtech.com/IT/showdoc.aspx?
Anyhow - good luck to you.
Note - those aren't the benchmarks I've seen before that inlcude mysql.
Your issue appears to be that you will ony buy from a select few vendors. We buy from HP only, and their Opteron systems are cheaper than their XEON systems accross the board.
Here http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_content.asp?id=scp uso&page=7&cookie%5Ftest=1