" It is frustrating to see so many of them still on IE 7, XP, and Office 2003, which hurts Windows and Office sales and holds back Microsoft profits."
See if that makes more sense...
Cheers, Dave
What about webmasters who want to use HTML 5? What about me as a user sititng around waiting? They harm everyone else. It forces software companies to release software that only works in XP still to this day as in sold currently in 2013! I think it hurts everyone as we are connected.
Sorry to break this to you but get used to it. Both individual users and corporate IT will stay on an existing version that works even if it only works with known problems rather than upgrade to the latest and greatest (with unknown problems). End users just want it to work so they can do what they have been doing.
You need to go sit next to someone who has just had Windows 8 (or the original release of Gnome 3 so I'm not just Microsoft bashing) foisted upon them to understand why users have learned the hard way that the latest and greatest is something to be feared.
When we lived in the L.A. area (San Pedro, Wilminton, Torrance) it was rent then buy a condo and then move up to a townhouse. The problem is that once you get used to having a decent sized house in a nice neighborhood with a few blades of grass it gets really hard to justify moving back to a dinky shack in a bad neighborhood. This was for a job in the bay area on the penninsula which has the added disadvantage of being almost inaccessible. Also, my wife and I are both "outdoors" types who like to be able to get AWAY from the city. Metropolitan has almost no attraction for us.
I did get a kick out of the people who worked at Northrop-Grumman in Hawthorne (plant right next to Hawthorne airport) and flew in from Big Bear/Lake Arrowhead as their commute.
Move to an area with a drastic shortage of IT talent like California (LA, Orange County or Bay Area). Every company I know has open reqs and can't find anyone to fill them. If you are any good at all, you could be making six figures within 5 years.
...and even with that six figure income still not be able to afford to buy a house within a decently short commute of where you work.
I looked at moving from Colorado to the Bay area a few years back. We would have had to sell our nice 2400 sq. ft. house in a nice suburb and move to a 650 sq. ft. fixer upper in a not so nice neighborhood that costs 3X what we could get for our current house. We decided not to move. I lived in the L.A. area from 1980 to 1994. I knew people then who had two hour (one way) commutes in order to actually be able to afford a house (e.g., in Riverside or San Bernadino counties).
Looked at limit. Thanks for the somewhat snarky pointer. I still like my solution because of the control it gives me over the "disallow" rule as it is a separate rule; not a rate limit on the allow rule.
I'm an old perl monger so the fact that "there's more than one way to do it" is a feature not a problem.
Knowing my site's IP address (findable with some research) doesn't do him any good. He has to spoof the IP address of the location I'm connecting FROM. When I'm on the road and connecting in via ssh, I usually don't know (or care) what IP address I'm connecting from.
Somebody could try to sniff my ISP's traffic and watch for a connection to my ssh port and then attempt to spoof the source IP address for that traffic. They'd more likely step on someone else trying to hack my site, not me.
I used the same technique back when people were doing the DNS cache poisoning attacks to limit how many hits my DNS could get from the same source (first query should update the cache in a legitimate site's DNS so no reason why I should get repeated hits from the same site).
Except if they're all behind NAT; then you're hurting legitimate users.
Walk your way through what happens when multiple users from the same location attempt to access my site. The first one attempts to resolve my IP address and his DNS server gets a response. The only way someone might be inconvenienced is during the brief window between that first request and when the requester's DNS gets my IP address. If another user tries to access my site before my DNS responds to the first request, their DNS server will not get a response for their request but will get a response for the initial request. When their DNS server retries the address request, it will find my address already in it's cache and will respond to the subsequent request.
At worst, a user who just barely gets beat to generating their request for my site might notice a slight delay before their request is retried and gets resolved by THEIR DNS. I'd hardly call that "hurting legitimate users". The basic concept here is that DNS caching logic should normally prevent multiple requests from the same source whereas cache poisoning generates multiple such requests.
The little town of Empire, Colorado (about an hour west of Denver, on U.S. 40 headed toward Winter Park ski area) has an eatery/bar/town offices called "The Hard Rock Cafe". Empire was a hard rock mining town until most precious metal mining operations left the U.S. I'm thinking this place has been called the Hard Rock Cafe since long before the trendy, international chain took up the name. Haven't heard about any legal moves to make them change their name.
I've been using key based authentication for ssh for years. I just moved the service to a high port to get rid of all the script kiddy password guessing attempts that were clogging my log file. I also added a "throttle" in iptables: # Block brute force attacks # Drop repeated ssh connection attempts within 20 seconds interval -A INPUT -p tcp -m tcp -m state -m recent -i eth1 --dport 22222 --state NEW -j DROP --rcheck --seconds 20 --name THROTTLE --rsource
# Accept ssh connection if not attempted within past 20 sec. -A INPUT -p tcp -m tcp -m state -m recent -i eth1 --dport 22222 --state NEW -j ACCEPT --set --name THROTTLE --rsource
It just cuts down on the noise. I used the same technique back when people were doing the DNS cache poisoning attacks to limit how many hits my DNS could get from the same source (first query should update the cache in a legitimate site's DNS so no reason why I should get repeated hits from the same site).
I understand the need for something like the DMCA takedown process On the other hand there needs to be some level of balance such that filing a false DMCA takedown request has an appropriate consequence to whoever files such a fraudulent action. I'm thinking along the line of capital punishment for both whoever makes the faslse claim as well as their legal team and anyone else substantially involved. It would make people think twice about filing a false takedown.
Yeah, but the same can be said for any defensive system. They all only work until they run out of ammunition. During the battle of Leyte Gulf during WWII American destroyers and destroyer escorts ended up expending all of their regular ammunition against the approaching Japanese battle fleet and ended up firing illumination rounds as a means of at least distracting the Japanese from the escort carriers that they were defending. That hardly meant that the destroyers and destroyer escorts were worthless. In fact, they saved the bulk of the escort carriers they were defending.
Would they have done better with more ammunition? Probably. But the additional weight and additional cost would have also limited their manueverability and the number of ships available. The same can said of why wasn't something larger than a DD or DE assigned as escort and the simple answer is putting that resource there would have meant taking the resource away from someplace else.
All systems and especially weapons systems are a trade-off between a number of competing factors. One trade off is how much ammunition to carry. Nothing new here. Sorry that some nitwit got the original article published.
I worked air defense command and control software development in the late 1980s. Our load scenario was called "the silver sky" because it assumed everything would be comming at us. We used to joke that we only had to hit one airplane and the rest would go down from mid-air collisions.
Just because some hack put it in a novel doesn't mean ithat it's true.
This is EXACTLY why gun owners are against registration. The government cannot be trusted to maintain confidentiality of the data. Regardless of whether someone publishes the data like in this case or the government itself uses the data to coerce gun owners to give up their guns the result is the same.
So, pick a valid number that's not yours (I really am using 555-1212 but FB could have instituted a filter since I started using it). Something like the local Scientology branch, Jehova's Witnesses, somebody's FAX line, etc. Use your imagination.
I gave FB 555-1212 as my phone number. If someone wants to contact me, FB provides lots of ways for people I know to get in touch or request I "friend" them so they can.
Yeah. I own one of each. My point is that the rifle most U.S. troops (and lots of others) carried during WWII and afterward was the Garand with a clip. Right or wrong, calling the thingy that holds the ammunition devolved to being a clip since that what the Garand used. If you were the one guy carrying the BAR or a carbine, you tended to call the ammunition holder a clip (the other guys all knew that meant ammo holders for your weapon). People have only gotten fussy (or pedantic) since then.
It's kind of like saying that something weighs a kilogram. It's not correct but that's the general usage.
So I take two 15 round box magazines for my M1 Carbine and I tape them together with a partial overlap and pointing in oppsite directions (just like my father did during WWII so this isn't an original idea). Voila. I now have what is effectively a 30 round magazine.
I love the way liberals (in particular but some conservatives, too) think they can legislate away all of the world's problems when all their legislation does is change the nature of the problem. Usually, the only thing the legislation accomplishes is to take away some freedom.
Cheers, Dave
Post script on the "Clip" vs. "Magazine" debate. Clip is easier to say and most WWII and Korean war vets use the term "clip" since the Garand used a "clip" (from Wikipedia: The M1 "is an air-cooled, gas-operated, clip-fed, and semiautomatic shoulder weapon....")
If your reputation is as a shill site that won't review something because some corporate types are fighting with some other corporate types, that's not good for your brand.
Scary how many/.ers seem to believe that the trade press is fair, ballanced, reputable, accurate, responsible, caring, honest, trustworthy, etc.
They make their money from their adverisers. They know not to bite the hand that feeds them. Grow up and move out of your parent's basement. Yellow journalism started with the first paid advertisement.
Somehow ordering "a half litre" doesn't role off the tongue that way "pint" does. Ditto for cup of coffee. I just can't see myself saying, "I'm just not awake until I've had my first 250 ml of coffee in the morning."
I would hate to see the other units disappear as well but, as far as I'm concerned, someone should always be able to order a pint of ale. Any metric twaddle that threatens that should be thrown out with the other trash.
Slashdot Mirror
Ah, so I guess getting some snow tires is probably out of the question. Too bad. We just got about 8 inches of snow on Saturday.
Maybe I could keep for summer driving. I wonder if there is an option for a trailer hitch....
Cheers,
Dave
Odd that neither linked story tells us what kind of gas mileage to expect. I'd hate to buy one of these and then find out I can't afford to drive it.
Cheers,
Dave
" It is frustrating to see so many of them still on IE 7, XP, and Office 2003, which hurts Windows and Office sales and holds back Microsoft profits."
See if that makes more sense...
Cheers,
Dave
What about webmasters who want to use HTML 5? What about me as a user sititng around waiting? They harm everyone else. It forces software companies to release software that only works in XP still to this day as in sold currently in 2013! I think it hurts everyone as we are connected.
Sorry to break this to you but get used to it. Both individual users and corporate IT will stay on an existing version that works even if it only works with known problems rather than upgrade to the latest and greatest (with unknown problems). End users just want it to work so they can do what they have been doing.
You need to go sit next to someone who has just had Windows 8 (or the original release of Gnome 3 so I'm not just Microsoft bashing) foisted upon them to understand why users have learned the hard way that the latest and greatest is something to be feared.
Cheers,
Dave
" It is frustrating to see so many of them still on IE 7, XP, and Office 2003, which hurts Windows and Office sales and holds back Microsoft profits."
See if that makes more sense...
Cheers,
Dave
When we lived in the L.A. area (San Pedro, Wilminton, Torrance) it was rent then buy a condo and then move up to a townhouse. The problem is that once you get used to having a decent sized house in a nice neighborhood with a few blades of grass it gets really hard to justify moving back to a dinky shack in a bad neighborhood. This was for a job in the bay area on the penninsula which has the added disadvantage of being almost inaccessible. Also, my wife and I are both "outdoors" types who like to be able to get AWAY from the city. Metropolitan has almost no attraction for us.
I did get a kick out of the people who worked at Northrop-Grumman in Hawthorne (plant right next to Hawthorne airport) and flew in from Big Bear/Lake Arrowhead as their commute.
Cheers,
Dave
Move to an area with a drastic shortage of IT talent like California (LA, Orange County or Bay Area). Every company I know has open reqs and can't find anyone to fill them. If you are any good at all, you could be making six figures within 5 years.
...and even with that six figure income still not be able to afford to buy a house within a decently short commute of where you work.
I looked at moving from Colorado to the Bay area a few years back. We would have had to sell our nice 2400 sq. ft. house in a nice suburb and move to a 650 sq. ft. fixer upper in a not so nice neighborhood that costs 3X what we could get for our current house. We decided not to move. I lived in the L.A. area from 1980 to 1994. I knew people then who had two hour (one way) commutes in order to actually be able to afford a house (e.g., in Riverside or San Bernadino counties).
Cheers,
Dave
Looked at limit. Thanks for the somewhat snarky pointer. I still like my solution because of the control it gives me over the "disallow" rule as it is a separate rule; not a rate limit on the allow rule.
I'm an old perl monger so the fact that "there's more than one way to do it" is a feature not a problem.
Cheers,
Dave
Knowing my site's IP address (findable with some research) doesn't do him any good. He has to spoof the IP address of the location I'm connecting FROM. When I'm on the road and connecting in via ssh, I usually don't know (or care) what IP address I'm connecting from.
Somebody could try to sniff my ISP's traffic and watch for a connection to my ssh port and then attempt to spoof the source IP address for that traffic. They'd more likely step on someone else trying to hack my site, not me.
Cheers,
Dave
I used the same technique back when people were doing the DNS cache poisoning attacks to limit how many hits my DNS could get from the same source (first query should update the cache in a legitimate site's DNS so no reason why I should get repeated hits from the same site).
Except if they're all behind NAT; then you're hurting legitimate users.
Walk your way through what happens when multiple users from the same location attempt to access my site. The first one attempts to resolve my IP address and his DNS server gets a response. The only way someone might be inconvenienced is during the brief window between that first request and when the requester's DNS gets my IP address. If another user tries to access my site before my DNS responds to the first request, their DNS server will not get a response for their request but will get a response for the initial request. When their DNS server retries the address request, it will find my address already in it's cache and will respond to the subsequent request.
At worst, a user who just barely gets beat to generating their request for my site might notice a slight delay before their request is retried and gets resolved by THEIR DNS. I'd hardly call that "hurting legitimate users". The basic concept here is that DNS caching logic should normally prevent multiple requests from the same source whereas cache poisoning generates multiple such requests.
Cheers,
Dave
The little town of Empire, Colorado (about an hour west of Denver, on U.S. 40 headed toward Winter Park ski area) has an eatery/bar/town offices called "The Hard Rock Cafe". Empire was a hard rock mining town until most precious metal mining operations left the U.S. I'm thinking this place has been called the Hard Rock Cafe since long before the trendy, international chain took up the name. Haven't heard about any legal moves to make them change their name.
Cheers,
Dave
I've been using key based authentication for ssh for years. I just moved the service to a high port to get rid of all the script kiddy password guessing attempts that were clogging my log file. I also added a "throttle" in iptables:
# Block brute force attacks
# Drop repeated ssh connection attempts within 20 seconds interval
-A INPUT -p tcp -m tcp -m state -m recent -i eth1 --dport 22222 --state NEW -j DROP --rcheck --seconds 20 --name THROTTLE --rsource
# Accept ssh connection if not attempted within past 20 sec.
-A INPUT -p tcp -m tcp -m state -m recent -i eth1 --dport 22222 --state NEW -j ACCEPT --set --name THROTTLE --rsource
It just cuts down on the noise. I used the same technique back when people were doing the DNS cache poisoning attacks to limit how many hits my DNS could get from the same source (first query should update the cache in a legitimate site's DNS so no reason why I should get repeated hits from the same site).
Cheers,
Dave
Drone strike.
(Just kidding)
Cheers,
Dave
I understand the need for something like the DMCA takedown process On the other hand there needs to be some level of balance such that filing a false DMCA takedown request has an appropriate consequence to whoever files such a fraudulent action. I'm thinking along the line of capital punishment for both whoever makes the faslse claim as well as their legal team and anyone else substantially involved. It would make people think twice about filing a false takedown.
Cheers,
Dave
Yeah, but the same can be said for any defensive system. They all only work until they run out of ammunition. During the battle of Leyte Gulf during WWII American destroyers and destroyer escorts ended up expending all of their regular ammunition against the approaching Japanese battle fleet and ended up firing illumination rounds as a means of at least distracting the Japanese from the escort carriers that they were defending. That hardly meant that the destroyers and destroyer escorts were worthless. In fact, they saved the bulk of the escort carriers they were defending.
Would they have done better with more ammunition? Probably. But the additional weight and additional cost would have also limited their manueverability and the number of ships available. The same can said of why wasn't something larger than a DD or DE assigned as escort and the simple answer is putting that resource there would have meant taking the resource away from someplace else.
All systems and especially weapons systems are a trade-off between a number of competing factors. One trade off is how much ammunition to carry. Nothing new here. Sorry that some nitwit got the original article published.
Cheers,
Dave
I worked air defense command and control software development in the late 1980s. Our load scenario was called "the silver sky" because it assumed everything would be comming at us. We used to joke that we only had to hit one airplane and the rest would go down from mid-air collisions.
Just because some hack put it in a novel doesn't mean ithat it's true.
Cheers,
Dave
If builders built houses the way programmers built programs, the first woodpecker to come along would destroy civilization.
Gerald Weinberg
Trivia: Gerald Weinberg is the "w" in awk. Sadly, things haven't changed much since back when.
Cheers,
Dave
This is EXACTLY why gun owners are against registration. The government cannot be trusted to maintain confidentiality of the data. Regardless of whether someone publishes the data like in this case or the government itself uses the data to coerce gun owners to give up their guns the result is the same.
Cheers,
Dave
So, pick a valid number that's not yours (I really am using 555-1212 but FB could have instituted a filter since I started using it). Something like the local Scientology branch, Jehova's Witnesses, somebody's FAX line, etc. Use your imagination.
Cheers,
Dave
I gave FB 555-1212 as my phone number. If someone wants to contact me, FB provides lots of ways for people I know to get in touch or request I "friend" them so they can.
Cheers,
Dave
Yeah. I own one of each. My point is that the rifle most U.S. troops (and lots of others) carried during WWII and afterward was the Garand with a clip. Right or wrong, calling the thingy that holds the ammunition devolved to being a clip since that what the Garand used. If you were the one guy carrying the BAR or a carbine, you tended to call the ammunition holder a clip (the other guys all knew that meant ammo holders for your weapon). People have only gotten fussy (or pedantic) since then.
It's kind of like saying that something weighs a kilogram. It's not correct but that's the general usage.
Cheers,
Dave
So I take two 15 round box magazines for my M1 Carbine and I tape them together with a partial overlap and pointing in oppsite directions (just like my father did during WWII so this isn't an original idea). Voila. I now have what is effectively a 30 round magazine.
I love the way liberals (in particular but some conservatives, too) think they can legislate away all of the world's problems when all their legislation does is change the nature of the problem. Usually, the only thing the legislation accomplishes is to take away some freedom.
Cheers,
Dave
Post script on the "Clip" vs. "Magazine" debate. Clip is easier to say and most WWII and Korean war vets use the term "clip" since the Garand used a "clip" (from Wikipedia: The M1 "is an air-cooled, gas-operated, clip-fed, and semiautomatic shoulder weapon....")
...
If your reputation is as a shill site that won't review something because some corporate types are fighting with some other corporate types, that's not good for your brand.
Scary how many /.ers seem to believe that the trade press is fair, ballanced, reputable, accurate, responsible, caring, honest, trustworthy, etc.
They make their money from their adverisers. They know not to bite the hand that feeds them. Grow up and move out of your parent's basement. Yellow journalism started with the first paid advertisement.
Cheers,
Daver
Sarchasm: the huge void that separates someone who doesn't get it from sarcastic humor.
Cheers,
Dave
Somehow ordering "a half litre" doesn't role off the tongue that way "pint" does. Ditto for cup of coffee. I just can't see myself saying, "I'm just not awake until I've had my first 250 ml of coffee in the morning."
Cheers,
Dave
I would hate to see the other units disappear as well but, as far as I'm concerned, someone should always be able to order a pint of ale. Any metric twaddle that threatens that should be thrown out with the other trash.
Cheers,
Dave