You have no idea of how cellular access works in most of the world.
You don't get to set the cap. You may buy a package with a certain cap. You hit that, and you start getting charged. Sometimes without warning. EU law says things like they have to notify you once you're already into them for £50 or so for roaming international. Note: Notify. Not stop. So while your phone is racking up charges for data abroad, you're being hit with stupendous costs, sometimes priced per Megabyte. I shit you not. And you may not find out until the next morning or even until you get home and find the bill.
The "cap" is the cap on the free stuff included in your package. Not a cap at all. And money-making. So they do as little as legally required to do anything about you going into it. Hence most people SWITCH OFF 3G/4G at certain times to avoid charges and go with Wifi instead. And then fucking clever iOS 9 thinks it knows better and turns that around.
There isn't a cellular provider in my country, or the EU, that I'm aware of that actually has a cap when they will stop your access to data. They may slow you. they may start to charge you, but they don't "cap" you at all, even if that's the terminology they use.
But even then, it hardly matters if - when you need the data - you're at the cap, can't use it without being charged extra, and all the time you were connected to Wifi to avoid exactly that situation.
I'm sure your parents said the same about your attachment to that same TV that's been carried through to adulthood even though it is - by your own account - fairly redundant.
And parents before that moaned about the children's attachment to the wireless that they never had, and so on, and so forth.
Manage their time, of course, like any sensible parent you want them to experience the whole gamut. But as for myself it was books under bedcovers by torchlight and then, later, games consoles, even TV under the bedcovers, and so on, kids today have no attachment to physical photographs, to paper books, to written letters or to scribbled notes in the classroom. Those things were *our* generation's communication.
These things are *their* generations. As sad as it sounds, they will look back fondly in their middle age to "those iPad things", to YouTube ("Who remembers that!"), telling their kids that they had to wait for movies to be released on "The Netflix", and so on.
Nothing's changed. Just the technology. I guarantee you that your daughter's first love letter will be by text or WhatsApp or some similar means and will mean just as much to her. And your son's first fascination with whatever becomes his career will come from watching a nature program, a documentary, a movie, or whatever on his tablet.
Yes, it's hard to comprehend for us. But it's not that hard to step back and see why.
No. But it does push Windows 8.0 and 8.1 update prompts still. And "security" updates to improve their telemetry on those systems still. And all kinds of junk masquerading as a necessary update.
Honestly, I have to decline more updates than I accept, especially when you include the application updates too.
I don't see the solution to MS forcing an option you don't want and they could easily provide ways for you to exclude as being to use more of their software on more machines.
I treat Apple products just like this. You chose to buy that stuff, if you asked me I would have told you not to, I could supply enough reasons to justify that claim, but yet you still went down that path.
When I was self-employed, my mantra was "I charge prices relative to the amount of my advice that you ignored, and the amount of stupidity you deployed". It tended to work. When people made bad decisions, I charged a lot more for the cleanup and they learned not to make bad decisions (or to fix it themselves when they did).
It's getting harder and harder to support MS stuff, especially for the home, and no matter how many times you tell people not to upgrade, they do it "just because" or "to get rid of the message". The fallout from that is their problem, as hard as that is. Especially if they've been warned about that, had those things happen in the past, etc.
The longer I stay in IT, the less I want to deal with people's home problems. At first, I made a living just fixing people's PC's. Now I spend so much time fighting it as part of my job (with responsibility and liability should I not get it done right), that the last thing I want to do is sort out other people's PC's too.
It's a sad state of affairs that computing is such a commercialised environment that it's got that bad, and that it's just not worth the time and effort to clean up.
And though I use Windows at home, it's Windows 7, with updates disabled, behind a decent firewall to prevent accidental updates. And that's mostly for games and all the real work is inside VMWare VM's on that machine.
Sorry, people. You've been trained into - and sold - a system which is being slowly turned into a cash cow under Microsoft / Apple's control. Home users will have to follow or deliberately do something different to everyone else. Businesses too. Remember all those times that your IT guys told you it didn't HAVE to be a Microsoft system but you were reliably informed by some business trade mag that it was the defacto standard and you couldn't live without it? This is the price.
I actually still enjoy working on Linux systems. They do what I tell them. Of course, I don't have systemd and some other shit, including most of the modern GUI's, installed on them because the creep is even there too. But Windows I get to my config (which involves turning all this shit off), and then I leave it like that and don't tinker unless something breaks. It's a sad state of affairs.
My education was virtually free. Paid for by government grants. Hard work, but best thing I ever did. Worth every penny that was spent on me.
It was also in mathematics, because the Computer Science side was maths-heavy and I already knew how to program before I even got close to university. Honestly, there was a year's course on Introduction to Programming, I skipped it and emailed in the coursework every week instead.
I was far too busy actually programming to be taught how to program. Also, the techniques they were using were old-hat when you've been coding since you were a kid. Seriously, I was showing Masters students how to properly perform mini-max and tweak it to be more efficient for their particular data, while still a first-year undergrad. I considered the CS side to be a bit pathetic (though the compilers and interpreters course was far too heavy on the grammar interpretations and far too light on actually getting something that could compile or interpret).
Sorry to blow out your theory for you.
P.S. I not only self-taught, but I taught my own classes while still in school (before university). The teachers decided that the other students would get a better experience that way, so I was basically the CS teacher for my own CS course while at school. I got my maths degree. Leapt into a career in IT. Have been in it ever since.
And I still say that the BEST THING I ever did was go to university and get the degree (maths & computer science). My coding went from a list of instructions that solved the problem to a structured set of algorithms with provable consequences and timing.
Few people using a spreadsheet need anything more than integers and currency formats, and the odd percentage. If you're calculating millions of dollars and chopping odd percents and odd fractions here and there, and relying on a spreadsheet of any kind, you're in for a world of hurt.
Spreadsheets are used by every small/medium business, to tot up their earnings, which are invariably integer or - at most - two decimal places.
The kind of place that needs any more precision shouldn't be using a spreadsheet (e.g. mathematicians, engineering etc.) and/or should be double-checking every entry another way anyway (e.g. accounting, engineering).
Unfortunately for your mindset, there are MILLIONS of times more people doing their basic accounting in a spreadsheet - as they probably should if they don't want to pay a fortune to Sage - than frustrated mathematicians who can't afford MatLab, Maple or similar.
It's like asking why a bank prints out ten million customer statements using Word. They shouldn't be. But they might well draft something in Word to send to the printer or provide the template for the report output. But there are a million small businesses, authors, technical writers, lab technicians, lawyers, and a myriad other professions out there for whom Word is perfectly adequate.
You don't NEED to do it on your LAN. You're choosing to. I have an IPv6-capable router. It picks up an IP range from the external ISP, then offers it - with sensible defaults - to the network. It's the default, power-on configuration. The same as it was for IPv4.
Use RA only for routing, use DHCPv6 for address and DDNS.
Yes, address configuration is a mess with IPv6 because of the number of competing services. But there are only a handful of combinations that work and do everything you need. And they invariably involve one-off daemon setup and then forget-about-it.
Why are you hard-coding the prefix? Why are you changing the prefix?
You pick up the interfaces you want, and move on. You don't need to type it out. And by the time you get to a firewall with multiple externally visible IP's, plus VLAN's, plus rules, plus routers, etc. then you hand it off to an IT guy who will a) put in a config not based on hard-coded, hand-typed IP's, b) put it behind routers and services that have GUI or database management.
Seriously, people, you should no more be sitting there entering IP's than you ever have before. And once you get past a small handful, you never type them again anyway.
I mean, honestly, have you guys never heard of copy/paste either? I deal with hundreds of IP's, I even have the prefix on autocomplete and the externals etc. are kept in a database or in a spreadsheet depending on the task.
This is honestly the WORST argument against IPv6 that I've ever seen. Hell, as far as I'm concerned, the second a user has to read-out, or type in, some IP address on your system, you've already failed.
Man makes name for himself in industry after years of hard work, study, diligent research - not fucking news.
Man is briefly fastest coder after leaving school because he can't cope with having to learn a bit of history alongside his talents - fucking news.
Stop this shit, because Kid who is briefly fastest coder could have gone to fucking school, even specialist computing school, and been an even better coder.
In the EU, the controls you are saying will ruin cars/drivers are already in place.
Although things are being looked at in light of the VW scandal, the tests here are much stricter and all this will do is make them stricter still. The problem is not that the manufacturers NEED to break emission levels in order to achieve what the driver wants, it's that drivers are all expecting unnecessary road performance that wasn't present even 30-40 years ago. We're ALL driving cars that could bear Formula-One cars from certain eras. Do we need to be? No.
That emission control also gives fuel economy for the sacrifice of raw speed is not a bad thing. Every car in your country can do the speed limit - and more. They can all do 0-60 in under 12-15 seconds - and more. They don't need to be able to do that.
Suggesting that VW can't sell a car just because it doesn't go much faster than the speed limit misses out entire sections of the population (those that don't want that, those that have kids, etc.) in an era when people are voluntarily speed-limiting their vehicles (e.g. company cars), having the insurance companies track them, and the most road surveillance there's ever been (I contest that if you're learning to drive today, you're a prick to think that getting into the habit of speeding as a matter of course will serve you well in the future).
In the EU the limits are stricter, the testing more rigorous and - well, who cares? My 15-year-old car can still do 0-60 in under 10, can provably do 130-140 mph without any special preparation, etc. We don't need that. We need fuel economy and to stop them churning out crap.
"Being found out" will lead to the same speeds of cars, the same looks of cars, the same desirability of cars, but without all the crap in the air. The ENTIRE PURPOSE of car ECUs is to conform to emissions controls. They now - and always have - only slow the potential of the engine to stop it getting into bad burning that pollutes unnecessarily. Eliminating that does not destroy the market, the EU prove that - but being found to cheat the tests and maybe having all your customers cars recalled? That fucks you up big-time.
Nobody will care. The stricter standards already in the EU will come in. Old polluters will die out almost entirely within 10 years or so. And nobody will know any different because ALL the cars will have to pass the same tests. Diesel won't go away, cars will still be able to speed, pricks will still burn off at the lights, but we won't be giving kids asthma for the next 60 years either.
And, thus, people like yourself don't understand enough to be worried about having to plug in an IPv6 address anyway.
Seriously, do you sit and hand-craft your local DNS zones for each individual machine? That's where you're going wrong, not having to put in a long IPv6 address.
Agreed. If you aren't capable of using SNI, then chances are your server software, client, etc. are not fit to be on the Internet anyway.
IE6, Firefox *1* (!), Chrome 4. If you're still using those, get something else immediately because your security of the certificate is then the LEAST of your worries.
I'm waiting for the "Let's Encrypt" to start issuing certificates. When that happens, interesting things will happen in the SSL/TLS certificate market.
If you are typing or using IP addresses for ANYTHING other than you primary DNS servers, you're doing something wrong.
Seriously - set statics on your DNS servers (which can even be IPv4!), plug that into your DHCP etc. servers. Done.
This is the problem with IPv6 - those people whining about it aren't in charge of networks where it could be an issue anyway.
P.S. likely your mobile phone and maybe even your cable setup has been using IPv6 addresses for a few years now. They are specified and necessary in related standards. Did you notice? No. Because nobody types in IP addresses any more, not even on their home networks, work networks, thousands of servers, etc.
To be honest, MAC addresses are much more problematic to me, but I barely ever have to type those either.
In the UK, it's 14 pounds (lb) of weight. In the imperial system that pre-dates anything metric and even gets the symbols it uses from the Latin (lb = libra).
Come back when your measurement system is several thousand years old.
It's not about playing GTA V on three monitors. It's showing you that it can handle three times what GTA V needs in a demo.
And you might be able to buy something cheaper but it's not going to be small enough or light enough to lug around, come with a built-in UPS (laptop battery), etc.
Don't forget - if it can do three GTA V screens simultaneously, that means it can do one GTA V screen at 1/3rd power. And still scale for a good time after you've bought it (which makes that investment more worthwhile).
Personally, Googling for their MSI model, I'm actually disappointed that it's not powerful enough. It's only 4-core with 8Gb. My old gaming laptop bought several years ago beats that in its stock configuration, and came with the same 8/8.1/10 upgrades as options to its supplied 7 licence. And it can play GTA V. In fact, I played the entire game through on that laptop. While Alt-Tabbing to work, VM's, browsing, and 1000 other games on my Steam account.
A gaming laptop isn't just for gaming. It's a laptop that - when pushed and plugged in - can game competitively with a desktop. You'd have to buy a laptop AND a gaming PC to compete and then you'd have two machine with two different purposes that you have to switch between and lug around. Not to mention the screen.
Or one laptop that you can take to work, play on the train, game seriously at home or a LAN party, and do whatever you want on it without having to suffer any major "disadvantage". PC's can't be moved. Laptops with non-gaming graphics are shit at games. Gaming laptops are the happy medium.
Don't think of it as a laptop that you just game on.
Think of it as a small gaming computer you can have on your lap, with built-in UPS, that you can also take to work or on holiday.
Seriously, gaming notebooks are the best combination of things - powerful, off-grid, mobile, small, portable. I've taken to buying a better laptop and not bothering with a desktop at all. With all your games, all your work, all your VM's, and you can take it anywhere and game anywhere that there's a plug socket - LAN parties, on holiday, and still do all your work on the same PC on the train if you want.
Polygraphs are bunkum. No other civilised country in the world admits them as evidence in court. They are akin to reading star-signs, "getting a bad feeling" or divining for water. Seriously.
My objection - were I ever to be approached for such a thing - would not be medical. It would be that they are LIES in themselves. There is absolutely no scientific evidence for them, and they can be deceived quite easily (which is why the one country that does use them has to have a law about trying to circumvent them, or even disseminating information about how to circumvent them).
They are false, inaccurate, unreliable, machines interpreted by a biased and inexpert human being (who cannot demonstrate their effectiveness beyond statistical error) which you aren't allowed to disagree with.
As such, not having wiped your bottom properly might "skew" the results, let alone conditions of the skin, blood, stress, mental conditions, etc.
Just hope that if you ever have to take one (I won't because I only visit civilised countries), that the guy taking the test likes you. That's literally as "scientific" as they get.
Sorry but that's not true - and Google and other websites, not to mention end-users, are capable of detecting these kinds of things.
To intercept traffic, you need to have accepted a trusted root certificate at some point. Doing so can MITM traffic but all your local SSL connections will be signed by that cert. That rings alarm bells in modern browsers, not to mention it's as simple as double-clicking the green bar to find it.
No modern AV that I've used has done this. However, I *have* manually pushed such a config for a web filter in the schools I work. It's not just as simple as nobody noticing - shit breaks when you do that if you're not careful and make certain exceptions.
But what I would really say was the cause of your complaint was letting your AV interfere at all in your web browser. It has no fucking need. There's no need to scan web pages before you browse them, as you browse them, or browse them on your behalf. That's not a reason that I've ever deployed AV for. That's what web proxies are for. And that's where you do your interception.
The problem is really "Internet Suites" which consist of AV (live-scanning and scheduled disk scans), firewall, intrusion detection, rootkit detection, even hooking of various functions within the operating system. Hell some of them are basically hypervisors letting you run unknown programs in isolated containers, task manager replacements, etc. That's feature-creep.
There is no evidence I can see that Sophos or Comodo install MITM certificates (unless you specifically configure it as such manually in Enteprise versions of Sophos, but that's an entirely different product DESIGNED to do that).
And if you're worried - turn off your AV. AV is one of the most privacy-intrusive things ever - it logs and records exactly what files and processes you manipulated when, analyses them, can send them back to the cloud, and interferes in EVERY file read and write you ever do, infected or not. As such, I have much more distrust of AV for that (especially given that I believe that companies like Kaspersky have been accused of all kinds of nasty things in collusion with governments) than anything to do with putting a quite obvious certificate in a certificate store that you can browse, and which each certificate signed by that will differ from the original when there are entire processes inside browsers and online to detect such things.
I work for a private school that's near a huge town inside the M25. It sits in the middle of borough-owned land and the land was sold to the borough with a permanent legal edict that it can only be used for a school. Thus, even the government can never build anything else on it but a school. There are no neighbours to speak of (the school owns most of the surrounding buildings for staff), and nobody can even SEE the school from the local towns/roads anyway as its so set back. There are huge full-size pylons going through school grounds so it's hardly a picture-postcard to start with.
To my knowledge, the school have at least 4-8 planning applications on the go at any one time. Some of them pre-date even the oldest members of staff, and most of them are handled by staff that inherited them when they started the job. Some are tiny (e.g. to combine existing sheds into a more structured building), some are huge (e.g. to take hundreds more students in a purpose-built building). Rarely does anything get approved, and it takes literally years, sometimes decades, to get close. By which time the planning application may have been back and forth with architects, legal departments and the planning people some dozens of times because of necessary changes caused by new laws etc. introduced in the meantime.
Not only that, but when you get close, the plans are heavily modified and usually are nowhere close to fit-for-purpose so the projects get abandoned or restarted under another plan.
As such, the history of the buildings that are there show you that they get about one plan approved every 10 years or so. There's the original house, the block they added in the 60's, the one they added in the 70's, the 80's, the 90's, etc. The total size of the school is about, maybe, three times the size of the original building and still NOWHERE NEAR encroaching on any services, neighbours, people's views, etc.
Planning is an absolute roadblock to all these kinds of things. We wanted a decent Internet connection. We couldn't get one over traditional lines (because we're SO FAR AWAY from anyone who has a telephone!). Even VDSL could only manage 11Mbps. So we needed a leased fibre.
It took three years to get one. Planning blocked every move. At one point, it was discovered that NOBODY KNEW who owned 12 feet of land. It took six months to resolve that, and I was told that was the fastest it's ever been done. The local borough had to apply to the Land Registry to take control of UNOWNED land, then cede that to itself, then ask itself permission for us to use it, etc.
In the end, we had to dig hundreds of metres of soil, with the aid of co-operative local landowners, ourselves to get close to where we could join up with a fibre provider. Three years after initial plans were laid, we got a 100Mbps connection. And all because of planners.
I've been asked to price up the IT for another building plan they are working on. After many years, they were expecting an answer and then we could start laying the groundwork for it. Turns out, it's going to be nearly the end of the year before the next stage happens. Nobody is surprised. And there's now little point pricing up. Who cares how much a fibre run would have cost to put in many months ago before all the building plans were changed again?
Given that the school is in the "millions of pounds" territory, that the site can never be used for anything else, and that we're miles from disturbing anyone, it still takes decades. You have to have at least 5 plans on the go or you'll never get anything done... if you submit a plan every year, then in ten year's time you might get maybe 1/5th of those plans approved, but at least you have something to be getting on with. If all you have is one request, in one place, and can only ask once? Come back in 5 years when it's refused and resubmit the same plan again. It'll never happen.
Not saying that I disagree with there being the need for planning permission, especially in cities and where pe
Sorry, but to my mind open source is not about making everything open, free, and changeable by everyone. It's about freedom of choice.
If I *want* to load up WINE with some layer that can load random binaries... that's my choice. If I want to compile some code myself, that's my choice. If I want to run it as hypervisor for a proprietary VM, that's my choice. If I want my Steam games to work on Ubuntu, that's my choice.
In essence, the Linux Foundation, the FSF, even the EFF, are blinkered here. They see choice as "do everything the open way or not at all", rather than "provide functions so people can choose what they want to do with their machines". They have lost their message among a stream of arguments of "how free" and not considered that freedom includes the ability to DO WHAT YOU WANT. Even if that is stupid by your eyes, you're not the one in charge of my computer.
By that level, I see Steam as the correct level of DRM. Enough to get the AAA titles on board, and enough that in 11 years of using it, and 1000 titles on my account, I've never felt hindered by the DRM deployed in it. I have a freedom to choose that if I so wish.
Stallman, et al, just remind me of people who moan that I don't vote their way. They tell me that "people died for my right to vote". No. They died for my right to be free enough to CHOOSE. That's deeper, stronger, encompassing the mere subset of "my right to vote". I do not vote, because I do not agree with ANY of the candidates. No, I will not "just vote the closest" either. That's like being told you can only have Apple or Microsoft, not Linux/BSD etc., so just pick the one closest to Linux. That's not how it works.
As such, Valve/Steam has done more for gaming on Linux than ANY OTHER COMPANY IN THE WORLD. Even the nVidia's that really don't want to help out with things like drivers. And, no, their DRM is not free and ideal. But I'd be perfectly happy running it on Linux even though I choose Linux to retain control of my computer.
I've happily used and deployed Linux as everything from servers to my personal desktops of several years, to handheld gaming devices built specifically for it. And I'd be quite happy to have Steam bring their whole library across. Hell, I'm over the moon that nearly a third of my game library "just works" in Linux.
Just because you hold an opinion, don't speak for the world, or organisations. I'm pretty sure the Linux Foundation has no strong feelings whatsoever about Steam coming over to it, but would err towards the positive. You can ask them if you like.
To me, freedom in software is about choice - including the choice to emulate Windows, run binaries, have DOSBox, run VM's, etc. The second someone says to me "But it's an open system, you can't do that", it's no longer a open system.
Slashdot Mirror
You have no idea of how cellular access works in most of the world.
You don't get to set the cap. You may buy a package with a certain cap. You hit that, and you start getting charged. Sometimes without warning. EU law says things like they have to notify you once you're already into them for £50 or so for roaming international. Note: Notify. Not stop. So while your phone is racking up charges for data abroad, you're being hit with stupendous costs, sometimes priced per Megabyte. I shit you not. And you may not find out until the next morning or even until you get home and find the bill.
The "cap" is the cap on the free stuff included in your package. Not a cap at all. And money-making. So they do as little as legally required to do anything about you going into it. Hence most people SWITCH OFF 3G/4G at certain times to avoid charges and go with Wifi instead. And then fucking clever iOS 9 thinks it knows better and turns that around.
There isn't a cellular provider in my country, or the EU, that I'm aware of that actually has a cap when they will stop your access to data. They may slow you. they may start to charge you, but they don't "cap" you at all, even if that's the terminology they use.
But even then, it hardly matters if - when you need the data - you're at the cap, can't use it without being charged extra, and all the time you were connected to Wifi to avoid exactly that situation.
I'm sure your parents said the same about your attachment to that same TV that's been carried through to adulthood even though it is - by your own account - fairly redundant.
And parents before that moaned about the children's attachment to the wireless that they never had, and so on, and so forth.
Manage their time, of course, like any sensible parent you want them to experience the whole gamut. But as for myself it was books under bedcovers by torchlight and then, later, games consoles, even TV under the bedcovers, and so on, kids today have no attachment to physical photographs, to paper books, to written letters or to scribbled notes in the classroom. Those things were *our* generation's communication.
These things are *their* generations. As sad as it sounds, they will look back fondly in their middle age to "those iPad things", to YouTube ("Who remembers that!"), telling their kids that they had to wait for movies to be released on "The Netflix", and so on.
Nothing's changed. Just the technology. I guarantee you that your daughter's first love letter will be by text or WhatsApp or some similar means and will mean just as much to her. And your son's first fascination with whatever becomes his career will come from watching a nature program, a documentary, a movie, or whatever on his tablet.
Yes, it's hard to comprehend for us. But it's not that hard to step back and see why.
No. But it does push Windows 8.0 and 8.1 update prompts still. And "security" updates to improve their telemetry on those systems still. And all kinds of junk masquerading as a necessary update.
Honestly, I have to decline more updates than I accept, especially when you include the application updates too.
I don't see the solution to MS forcing an option you don't want and they could easily provide ways for you to exclude as being to use more of their software on more machines.
Yup.
I treat Apple products just like this. You chose to buy that stuff, if you asked me I would have told you not to, I could supply enough reasons to justify that claim, but yet you still went down that path.
When I was self-employed, my mantra was "I charge prices relative to the amount of my advice that you ignored, and the amount of stupidity you deployed". It tended to work. When people made bad decisions, I charged a lot more for the cleanup and they learned not to make bad decisions (or to fix it themselves when they did).
It's getting harder and harder to support MS stuff, especially for the home, and no matter how many times you tell people not to upgrade, they do it "just because" or "to get rid of the message". The fallout from that is their problem, as hard as that is. Especially if they've been warned about that, had those things happen in the past, etc.
The longer I stay in IT, the less I want to deal with people's home problems. At first, I made a living just fixing people's PC's. Now I spend so much time fighting it as part of my job (with responsibility and liability should I not get it done right), that the last thing I want to do is sort out other people's PC's too.
It's a sad state of affairs that computing is such a commercialised environment that it's got that bad, and that it's just not worth the time and effort to clean up.
And though I use Windows at home, it's Windows 7, with updates disabled, behind a decent firewall to prevent accidental updates. And that's mostly for games and all the real work is inside VMWare VM's on that machine.
Sorry, people. You've been trained into - and sold - a system which is being slowly turned into a cash cow under Microsoft / Apple's control. Home users will have to follow or deliberately do something different to everyone else. Businesses too. Remember all those times that your IT guys told you it didn't HAVE to be a Microsoft system but you were reliably informed by some business trade mag that it was the defacto standard and you couldn't live without it? This is the price.
I actually still enjoy working on Linux systems. They do what I tell them. Of course, I don't have systemd and some other shit, including most of the modern GUI's, installed on them because the creep is even there too. But Windows I get to my config (which involves turning all this shit off), and then I leave it like that and don't tinker unless something breaks. It's a sad state of affairs.
My education was virtually free. Paid for by government grants. Hard work, but best thing I ever did. Worth every penny that was spent on me.
It was also in mathematics, because the Computer Science side was maths-heavy and I already knew how to program before I even got close to university. Honestly, there was a year's course on Introduction to Programming, I skipped it and emailed in the coursework every week instead.
I was far too busy actually programming to be taught how to program. Also, the techniques they were using were old-hat when you've been coding since you were a kid. Seriously, I was showing Masters students how to properly perform mini-max and tweak it to be more efficient for their particular data, while still a first-year undergrad. I considered the CS side to be a bit pathetic (though the compilers and interpreters course was far too heavy on the grammar interpretations and far too light on actually getting something that could compile or interpret).
Sorry to blow out your theory for you.
P.S. I not only self-taught, but I taught my own classes while still in school (before university). The teachers decided that the other students would get a better experience that way, so I was basically the CS teacher for my own CS course while at school. I got my maths degree. Leapt into a career in IT. Have been in it ever since.
And I still say that the BEST THING I ever did was go to university and get the degree (maths & computer science). My coding went from a list of instructions that solved the problem to a structured set of algorithms with provable consequences and timing.
Few people using a spreadsheet need anything more than integers and currency formats, and the odd percentage. If you're calculating millions of dollars and chopping odd percents and odd fractions here and there, and relying on a spreadsheet of any kind, you're in for a world of hurt.
Spreadsheets are used by every small/medium business, to tot up their earnings, which are invariably integer or - at most - two decimal places.
The kind of place that needs any more precision shouldn't be using a spreadsheet (e.g. mathematicians, engineering etc.) and/or should be double-checking every entry another way anyway (e.g. accounting, engineering).
Unfortunately for your mindset, there are MILLIONS of times more people doing their basic accounting in a spreadsheet - as they probably should if they don't want to pay a fortune to Sage - than frustrated mathematicians who can't afford MatLab, Maple or similar.
It's like asking why a bank prints out ten million customer statements using Word. They shouldn't be. But they might well draft something in Word to send to the printer or provide the template for the report output. But there are a million small businesses, authors, technical writers, lab technicians, lawyers, and a myriad other professions out there for whom Word is perfectly adequate.
Same thing.
You don't NEED to do it on your LAN. You're choosing to. I have an IPv6-capable router. It picks up an IP range from the external ISP, then offers it - with sensible defaults - to the network. It's the default, power-on configuration. The same as it was for IPv4.
Use RA only for routing, use DHCPv6 for address and DDNS.
Yes, address configuration is a mess with IPv6 because of the number of competing services. But there are only a handful of combinations that work and do everything you need. And they invariably involve one-off daemon setup and then forget-about-it.
Why are you hard-coding the prefix? Why are you changing the prefix?
You pick up the interfaces you want, and move on. You don't need to type it out. And by the time you get to a firewall with multiple externally visible IP's, plus VLAN's, plus rules, plus routers, etc. then you hand it off to an IT guy who will a) put in a config not based on hard-coded, hand-typed IP's, b) put it behind routers and services that have GUI or database management.
Seriously, people, you should no more be sitting there entering IP's than you ever have before. And once you get past a small handful, you never type them again anyway.
I mean, honestly, have you guys never heard of copy/paste either? I deal with hundreds of IP's, I even have the prefix on autocomplete and the externals etc. are kept in a database or in a spreadsheet depending on the task.
This is honestly the WORST argument against IPv6 that I've ever seen. Hell, as far as I'm concerned, the second a user has to read-out, or type in, some IP address on your system, you've already failed.
Man makes name for himself in industry after years of hard work, study, diligent research - not fucking news.
Man is briefly fastest coder after leaving school because he can't cope with having to learn a bit of history alongside his talents - fucking news.
Stop this shit, because Kid who is briefly fastest coder could have gone to fucking school, even specialist computing school, and been an even better coder.
But that's not fucking news, is it?
In the EU, the controls you are saying will ruin cars/drivers are already in place.
Although things are being looked at in light of the VW scandal, the tests here are much stricter and all this will do is make them stricter still. The problem is not that the manufacturers NEED to break emission levels in order to achieve what the driver wants, it's that drivers are all expecting unnecessary road performance that wasn't present even 30-40 years ago. We're ALL driving cars that could bear Formula-One cars from certain eras. Do we need to be? No.
That emission control also gives fuel economy for the sacrifice of raw speed is not a bad thing. Every car in your country can do the speed limit - and more. They can all do 0-60 in under 12-15 seconds - and more. They don't need to be able to do that.
Suggesting that VW can't sell a car just because it doesn't go much faster than the speed limit misses out entire sections of the population (those that don't want that, those that have kids, etc.) in an era when people are voluntarily speed-limiting their vehicles (e.g. company cars), having the insurance companies track them, and the most road surveillance there's ever been (I contest that if you're learning to drive today, you're a prick to think that getting into the habit of speeding as a matter of course will serve you well in the future).
In the EU the limits are stricter, the testing more rigorous and - well, who cares? My 15-year-old car can still do 0-60 in under 10, can provably do 130-140 mph without any special preparation, etc. We don't need that. We need fuel economy and to stop them churning out crap.
"Being found out" will lead to the same speeds of cars, the same looks of cars, the same desirability of cars, but without all the crap in the air. The ENTIRE PURPOSE of car ECUs is to conform to emissions controls. They now - and always have - only slow the potential of the engine to stop it getting into bad burning that pollutes unnecessarily. Eliminating that does not destroy the market, the EU prove that - but being found to cheat the tests and maybe having all your customers cars recalled? That fucks you up big-time.
Nobody will care. The stricter standards already in the EU will come in. Old polluters will die out almost entirely within 10 years or so. And nobody will know any different because ALL the cars will have to pass the same tests. Diesel won't go away, cars will still be able to speed, pricks will still burn off at the lights, but we won't be giving kids asthma for the next 60 years either.
And, thus, people like yourself don't understand enough to be worried about having to plug in an IPv6 address anyway.
Seriously, do you sit and hand-craft your local DNS zones for each individual machine? That's where you're going wrong, not having to put in a long IPv6 address.
Agreed. If you aren't capable of using SNI, then chances are your server software, client, etc. are not fit to be on the Internet anyway.
IE6, Firefox *1* (!), Chrome 4. If you're still using those, get something else immediately because your security of the certificate is then the LEAST of your worries.
I'm waiting for the "Let's Encrypt" to start issuing certificates. When that happens, interesting things will happen in the SSL/TLS certificate market.
If you are typing or using IP addresses for ANYTHING other than you primary DNS servers, you're doing something wrong.
Seriously - set statics on your DNS servers (which can even be IPv4!), plug that into your DHCP etc. servers. Done.
This is the problem with IPv6 - those people whining about it aren't in charge of networks where it could be an issue anyway.
P.S. likely your mobile phone and maybe even your cable setup has been using IPv6 addresses for a few years now. They are specified and necessary in related standards. Did you notice? No. Because nobody types in IP addresses any more, not even on their home networks, work networks, thousands of servers, etc.
To be honest, MAC addresses are much more problematic to me, but I barely ever have to type those either.
No problem. Just revoke th... Oh.
I'm sorry, but I blame the "scientists" that do this more than the companies that fund this.
You're not a scientist if you answer only favours the highest bidder.
In the UK, it's 14 pounds (lb) of weight. In the imperial system that pre-dates anything metric and even gets the symbols it uses from the Latin (lb = libra).
Come back when your measurement system is several thousand years old.
It's not about playing GTA V on three monitors. It's showing you that it can handle three times what GTA V needs in a demo.
And you might be able to buy something cheaper but it's not going to be small enough or light enough to lug around, come with a built-in UPS (laptop battery), etc.
Don't forget - if it can do three GTA V screens simultaneously, that means it can do one GTA V screen at 1/3rd power. And still scale for a good time after you've bought it (which makes that investment more worthwhile).
Personally, Googling for their MSI model, I'm actually disappointed that it's not powerful enough. It's only 4-core with 8Gb. My old gaming laptop bought several years ago beats that in its stock configuration, and came with the same 8/8.1/10 upgrades as options to its supplied 7 licence. And it can play GTA V. In fact, I played the entire game through on that laptop. While Alt-Tabbing to work, VM's, browsing, and 1000 other games on my Steam account.
A gaming laptop isn't just for gaming. It's a laptop that - when pushed and plugged in - can game competitively with a desktop. You'd have to buy a laptop AND a gaming PC to compete and then you'd have two machine with two different purposes that you have to switch between and lug around. Not to mention the screen.
Or one laptop that you can take to work, play on the train, game seriously at home or a LAN party, and do whatever you want on it without having to suffer any major "disadvantage". PC's can't be moved. Laptops with non-gaming graphics are shit at games. Gaming laptops are the happy medium.
Don't think of it as a laptop that you just game on.
Think of it as a small gaming computer you can have on your lap, with built-in UPS, that you can also take to work or on holiday.
Seriously, gaming notebooks are the best combination of things - powerful, off-grid, mobile, small, portable. I've taken to buying a better laptop and not bothering with a desktop at all. With all your games, all your work, all your VM's, and you can take it anywhere and game anywhere that there's a plug socket - LAN parties, on holiday, and still do all your work on the same PC on the train if you want.
I think you need to check your courts.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
You accept it as evidence, in courts, and require it for employment in certain positions. 70,000 people a year. Compared to... well... zero elsewhere.
Yep.
But at least they can claim that the effect is supernatural / other-worldly with a straight face.
Sigh.
Polygraphs are bunkum. No other civilised country in the world admits them as evidence in court. They are akin to reading star-signs, "getting a bad feeling" or divining for water. Seriously.
My objection - were I ever to be approached for such a thing - would not be medical. It would be that they are LIES in themselves. There is absolutely no scientific evidence for them, and they can be deceived quite easily (which is why the one country that does use them has to have a law about trying to circumvent them, or even disseminating information about how to circumvent them).
They are false, inaccurate, unreliable, machines interpreted by a biased and inexpert human being (who cannot demonstrate their effectiveness beyond statistical error) which you aren't allowed to disagree with.
As such, not having wiped your bottom properly might "skew" the results, let alone conditions of the skin, blood, stress, mental conditions, etc.
Just hope that if you ever have to take one (I won't because I only visit civilised countries), that the guy taking the test likes you. That's literally as "scientific" as they get.
P.S. Try https://www.grc.com/fingerprin...
If your fingerprints on that page differ from the fingerprints on your browser's cert for those sites, you're being MITM'd.
e.g.
www.grc.com
01:56:D3:AC:CF:5A:3F:B8:8F:0F:B4:30:88:2D:F6:72:4E:8C:F2:E0
Sorry but that's not true - and Google and other websites, not to mention end-users, are capable of detecting these kinds of things.
To intercept traffic, you need to have accepted a trusted root certificate at some point. Doing so can MITM traffic but all your local SSL connections will be signed by that cert. That rings alarm bells in modern browsers, not to mention it's as simple as double-clicking the green bar to find it.
No modern AV that I've used has done this. However, I *have* manually pushed such a config for a web filter in the schools I work. It's not just as simple as nobody noticing - shit breaks when you do that if you're not careful and make certain exceptions.
But what I would really say was the cause of your complaint was letting your AV interfere at all in your web browser. It has no fucking need. There's no need to scan web pages before you browse them, as you browse them, or browse them on your behalf. That's not a reason that I've ever deployed AV for. That's what web proxies are for. And that's where you do your interception.
The problem is really "Internet Suites" which consist of AV (live-scanning and scheduled disk scans), firewall, intrusion detection, rootkit detection, even hooking of various functions within the operating system. Hell some of them are basically hypervisors letting you run unknown programs in isolated containers, task manager replacements, etc. That's feature-creep.
There is no evidence I can see that Sophos or Comodo install MITM certificates (unless you specifically configure it as such manually in Enteprise versions of Sophos, but that's an entirely different product DESIGNED to do that).
And if you're worried - turn off your AV. AV is one of the most privacy-intrusive things ever - it logs and records exactly what files and processes you manipulated when, analyses them, can send them back to the cloud, and interferes in EVERY file read and write you ever do, infected or not. As such, I have much more distrust of AV for that (especially given that I believe that companies like Kaspersky have been accused of all kinds of nasty things in collusion with governments) than anything to do with putting a quite obvious certificate in a certificate store that you can browse, and which each certificate signed by that will differ from the original when there are entire processes inside browsers and online to detect such things.
I work for a private school that's near a huge town inside the M25. It sits in the middle of borough-owned land and the land was sold to the borough with a permanent legal edict that it can only be used for a school. Thus, even the government can never build anything else on it but a school. There are no neighbours to speak of (the school owns most of the surrounding buildings for staff), and nobody can even SEE the school from the local towns/roads anyway as its so set back. There are huge full-size pylons going through school grounds so it's hardly a picture-postcard to start with.
To my knowledge, the school have at least 4-8 planning applications on the go at any one time. Some of them pre-date even the oldest members of staff, and most of them are handled by staff that inherited them when they started the job. Some are tiny (e.g. to combine existing sheds into a more structured building), some are huge (e.g. to take hundreds more students in a purpose-built building). Rarely does anything get approved, and it takes literally years, sometimes decades, to get close. By which time the planning application may have been back and forth with architects, legal departments and the planning people some dozens of times because of necessary changes caused by new laws etc. introduced in the meantime.
Not only that, but when you get close, the plans are heavily modified and usually are nowhere close to fit-for-purpose so the projects get abandoned or restarted under another plan.
As such, the history of the buildings that are there show you that they get about one plan approved every 10 years or so. There's the original house, the block they added in the 60's, the one they added in the 70's, the 80's, the 90's, etc. The total size of the school is about, maybe, three times the size of the original building and still NOWHERE NEAR encroaching on any services, neighbours, people's views, etc.
Planning is an absolute roadblock to all these kinds of things. We wanted a decent Internet connection. We couldn't get one over traditional lines (because we're SO FAR AWAY from anyone who has a telephone!). Even VDSL could only manage 11Mbps. So we needed a leased fibre.
It took three years to get one. Planning blocked every move. At one point, it was discovered that NOBODY KNEW who owned 12 feet of land. It took six months to resolve that, and I was told that was the fastest it's ever been done. The local borough had to apply to the Land Registry to take control of UNOWNED land, then cede that to itself, then ask itself permission for us to use it, etc.
In the end, we had to dig hundreds of metres of soil, with the aid of co-operative local landowners, ourselves to get close to where we could join up with a fibre provider. Three years after initial plans were laid, we got a 100Mbps connection. And all because of planners.
I've been asked to price up the IT for another building plan they are working on. After many years, they were expecting an answer and then we could start laying the groundwork for it. Turns out, it's going to be nearly the end of the year before the next stage happens. Nobody is surprised. And there's now little point pricing up. Who cares how much a fibre run would have cost to put in many months ago before all the building plans were changed again?
Given that the school is in the "millions of pounds" territory, that the site can never be used for anything else, and that we're miles from disturbing anyone, it still takes decades. You have to have at least 5 plans on the go or you'll never get anything done... if you submit a plan every year, then in ten year's time you might get maybe 1/5th of those plans approved, but at least you have something to be getting on with. If all you have is one request, in one place, and can only ask once? Come back in 5 years when it's refused and resubmit the same plan again. It'll never happen.
Not saying that I disagree with there being the need for planning permission, especially in cities and where pe
Sorry, but to my mind open source is not about making everything open, free, and changeable by everyone. It's about freedom of choice.
If I *want* to load up WINE with some layer that can load random binaries... that's my choice. If I want to compile some code myself, that's my choice. If I want to run it as hypervisor for a proprietary VM, that's my choice. If I want my Steam games to work on Ubuntu, that's my choice.
In essence, the Linux Foundation, the FSF, even the EFF, are blinkered here. They see choice as "do everything the open way or not at all", rather than "provide functions so people can choose what they want to do with their machines". They have lost their message among a stream of arguments of "how free" and not considered that freedom includes the ability to DO WHAT YOU WANT. Even if that is stupid by your eyes, you're not the one in charge of my computer.
By that level, I see Steam as the correct level of DRM. Enough to get the AAA titles on board, and enough that in 11 years of using it, and 1000 titles on my account, I've never felt hindered by the DRM deployed in it. I have a freedom to choose that if I so wish.
Stallman, et al, just remind me of people who moan that I don't vote their way. They tell me that "people died for my right to vote". No. They died for my right to be free enough to CHOOSE. That's deeper, stronger, encompassing the mere subset of "my right to vote". I do not vote, because I do not agree with ANY of the candidates. No, I will not "just vote the closest" either. That's like being told you can only have Apple or Microsoft, not Linux/BSD etc., so just pick the one closest to Linux. That's not how it works.
As such, Valve/Steam has done more for gaming on Linux than ANY OTHER COMPANY IN THE WORLD. Even the nVidia's that really don't want to help out with things like drivers. And, no, their DRM is not free and ideal. But I'd be perfectly happy running it on Linux even though I choose Linux to retain control of my computer.
I've happily used and deployed Linux as everything from servers to my personal desktops of several years, to handheld gaming devices built specifically for it. And I'd be quite happy to have Steam bring their whole library across. Hell, I'm over the moon that nearly a third of my game library "just works" in Linux.
Just because you hold an opinion, don't speak for the world, or organisations. I'm pretty sure the Linux Foundation has no strong feelings whatsoever about Steam coming over to it, but would err towards the positive. You can ask them if you like.
To me, freedom in software is about choice - including the choice to emulate Windows, run binaries, have DOSBox, run VM's, etc. The second someone says to me "But it's an open system, you can't do that", it's no longer a open system.