This. There was a time that ISPs and people on the Internet cared about port scans, that time is long gone (by at least 15 years). If you have a public IP you should assume it's being scanned all the time. Once you assume that these types of alerts have little additional meaning. If it really bothers you then you should implement some kind of pre-filter to block the IP range. I understand that your particular device doesn't allow that so put another router with proper access control list support in front of it if it bothers you so much. TLDR, unless you live in the past it's time to get over port scanning.
This! I just counted and am monitoring 15 different email boxes in Thunderbird right now as well as two calendars. What are we supposed to do? Web email clients are not an answer for power users of email. Not only would I need to login to 15 different sites to check all of the messages but I also need to periodically move messages from one account to another. That's all pretty easy from a unified email client but not from any current browser based offerings I know of.
Yep, I was going to say the same thing. Cisco has supported SEAL as a VPN crypto algorithm for quite a while. Not only has it been around for a long time but it's actually in commercial software (e.g. Cisco IOS) and has been refined several times (version 3 came out in 1997). Clearly Microsoft didn't do their due diligence on the name...
You might pay dividends to shareholders, you know like companies did in the good old days...or use it for employee compensation or lots of other things. You might not build factories, but on the other hand you might if there were some advantages to doing so (rapid prototyping, flexible manufacturing, JIT with tighter chain) a company could do the right thing every once in a while.
But that's beside the point, point is you're going to need to use the money somewhere (and probably not in the tax haven where you're storing it). When you eventually move the money into whatever country you are going to use it in you'll have to pay taxes on it.
Sure, but it was money made outside the US to begin with anyway, right? I guess I don't have a real problem with it then being spent outside the US. I also question how much you can really spend outside the US which will be of any substantial benefit to the corporation or shareholders. Sure, you can buy some subsidiaries like Microsoft bought Minecraft but at the end of the day what are they going to do? probably make money? so you have just compounded your problem and now you are stockpiling even more money you can't use where you actually want to use it.
Ok, so that's kind of an interesting scheme. Except that someday that loan will come due and you'll have to repatriate the money to pay it off at which time you'd pay taxes, right? So at the end of the day you've just deferred them longer.
Yeah, I'm typically pegged by others as one of those 'tax and spend' types but really it seems to me that these corporations have become so adept at avoiding taxes that they don't actually contribute much at the high tax bracket they're in anyway. It might increase total revenue collection $ if we lowered the corporate tax and made it more cost effective for them to simply pay the tax than to avoid it.
Also, I still don't understand how having $100m in overseas reserves you can't really use adds much value for shareholders, sure it adds some but because of the cost of actually using the money it seems like the value it adds would be roughly the same as repatriating the money and paying the taxes on it in the first place.
Sure, but at the end of the day those expenses could otherwise just be paid for with a loan which could be repaid in a better year as a legitimate expense you could write off (plus write off the interest) so they're really not escaping anything they couldn't do anyway, right?
Oh I'm sure there are some games where you can repatriate some of it and avoid some taxes covering losses during poor periods of performance, etc. but at the end of the day it would seem to me that would only be a small fraction of the total amount held in these havens. It seems like a lot of it is just holding on to money for the sake of holding on to it, it's not enriching the shareholders to have such stockpiled money, nor is it enriching the executives, it mostly seems silly to me but I have far to much common sense to work in high finance.
I understand that part, what I don't get is what's the long game? They build a huge amount of capital in Ireland, Bermuda, the Caymans, etc. but then what? If they want to actually use that money for something in a country like the US they're going to have to pay taxes on it, no? Seems to me it's really a tax deferral strategy and not avoidance?
Disconnecting the inputs would be unexpected behavior... Most good KVM switches do not do that because it causes the system to reinitialize the video output each time which can present it's own set of issues, hence the popularity of EDID devices like the "DVI Detective". I think you'll have a hard time finding a KVM device (particularly a good one) which does not do EDID management. What's unclear is why this is a problem in your situation.
Since I don't own one or work for Aten I can't really check that for you but I think that you can do what you want which is to move keyboard and mouse control over to CPU4 but it may require multiple steps of switching things around. They are pretty clear in the manual that either screen can have KVM focus so you can flip KVM focus to the other screen and the two systems flip screens and then you can reassign the CPUs back to the original screens as you want them. Sure it's a pain but you're asking for something pretty unusual to begin with. You may be able to find something a lot more expensive that does exactly what you want or you could live with something like this which does what you want but maybe not as efficiently and for a lot less cost.
Remember that you don't need to find dual monitor inputs! Because you can route any input to any display you can use two different inputs for connections to a single PC. If you want to use that PC is dual monitor configuration you just route input 1 to output 1 and input 2 to output 2, just ignore the keyboard/mouse inputs on the second input and just use the video switching portion for the second screen. Note that you'll need to find one with at least 2x5 capability though for your two dual output PCs and one laptop.
The CM0264 is dual monitor output, see the description (2x4) though now that I read your description again I see you have 2 dual monitor PCs and not just one so you actually need a 2x5 matrix KVM switch. They're also available (may be 2x6 or something higher) but will probably be quite a bit more expensive. Now that you know what you want exists and what it's called though (matrix KVM) I imagine you can Google it yourself.
Yes, except if you care about latency, etc. I'm assuming this user knows what they're talking about and has specifically requested a KVM for a reason. For example trying to do graphic design work, video editing, CAD, or a lot of other things over VNC or any screengrabber is not really feasible. Even just typing a word processing document is a bit of a pain with the lag...
What you want is called a matrix KVM switch. They exist, but they're quite expensive, do some Googling on matrix KVM switch and you'll see the options.
Yes, this. Read the article, they are talking about 400Mbps microwave links. That's a drop in the bucket compared with fiber bandwidth. This paper is all about latency above all else. First, I remain unconvinced that RF links are really different than fiber for latency. Second, I'm unconvinced very many people care about the difference of ~5ms in latency (using their numbers) and would consider bandwidth much more important. They point out one particular use case for low-latency, low-bandwidth links like this (high frequency trading) but for anything involving human interaction it seems like a non-issue.
I always smile when passing old long-lines towers on the road (or seeing them on top of central office buildings in large cities). You can get an idea of the size and scope of the network at http://long-lines.net/ which has some excellent maps such as http://i.imgur.com/HI0cMJ1.jpg showing the network.
I have given up trying to educate Slashdot readers about IPv6. Like most IT people they have stuck their heads in the sand and think NAT is the end-all-be-all. As an professor of IT I keep preaching knowing IPv6 to my students because someday IT management is going to wakeup to the fact that Asia (and other places) has moved on to IPv6 and if you want to do business with them you better be running it too. Then there will a rush to get everyone on IPv6 and people with experience will be in demand. So let them stick their heads in the sand, those of us who actually know the substantial advantages of IPv6 and are familiar with deploying and operating IPv6 networks will gladly be your highly compensated consultants when the day comes.
I don't know that it's really any more obscure than 3D modelling, desktop publishing, or any of the many other projects that get discussed on/. For those of us who work or dabble in music areas and appreciate being able FOSS MuseScore is really amazing software. It's also important for the education market where commercial software in the same genre can be very expensive. 1.x definitely has it's quirks but it's amazing (and important) to be able to at least compete on a basic level with Finale and Sibelius. I'm looking forward to trying out 2.0!
And if I want to cause you to have an accident in your pre-ECU car I can cause substantial damage with some wrenches and a minute. What's your real point? I want to maintain the ability to hack/modify my own vehicles. Encrypting bus communication would pretty much kill that unless their was a mandate to release the encryption keys to the vehicle owner (and then what about leased cars, financed cars, etc.) which is unlikely to happen. As long as it's not fully remotely exploitable (meaning you never have to have physical contact with my car) I'm not concerned.
This is exactly my own viewpoint. All of this is a bunch of stirred up nonsense. Yes, systems like OnStar which bridge between the CAN bus and the phone network need protection. What I absolutely do NOT want is to see encrypted communications that I as the owner cannot see in plaintext on a wired bus. This will put non-dealer mechanics out of business pretty quickly and/or drive up repair costs tremendously including effectively preventing me from working on my own car. I think it's a dream come true for dealers and manufacturers.
Yes, we need to prevent remote exploitation but I absolutely want to be able to hack and modify my own vehicle to my heart's content.
The requirement for physical access makes these so-called hacks against cars a non-starter for me. People have been cutting brake lines, loosening bolts, etc. on cars to harm people for a long time but we don't require hardened physical access to the car. This whole thing is way overblown by people trying to make headlines.
This, x1000. I would like to hear what use case this product has that is not already served by the many existing MIDI controllers. No serious keyboardist is going to play on a keyboard with a design like this.
Slashdot Mirror
This. There was a time that ISPs and people on the Internet cared about port scans, that time is long gone (by at least 15 years). If you have a public IP you should assume it's being scanned all the time. Once you assume that these types of alerts have little additional meaning. If it really bothers you then you should implement some kind of pre-filter to block the IP range. I understand that your particular device doesn't allow that so put another router with proper access control list support in front of it if it bothers you so much. TLDR, unless you live in the past it's time to get over port scanning.
Drupal is so old school, I hear the cool kids are using http://modx.com/ now.
This! I just counted and am monitoring 15 different email boxes in Thunderbird right now as well as two calendars. What are we supposed to do? Web email clients are not an answer for power users of email. Not only would I need to login to 15 different sites to check all of the messages but I also need to periodically move messages from one account to another. That's all pretty easy from a unified email client but not from any current browser based offerings I know of.
Yep, I was going to say the same thing. Cisco has supported SEAL as a VPN crypto algorithm for quite a while. Not only has it been around for a long time but it's actually in commercial software (e.g. Cisco IOS) and has been refined several times (version 3 came out in 1997). Clearly Microsoft didn't do their due diligence on the name...
You might pay dividends to shareholders, you know like companies did in the good old days...or use it for employee compensation or lots of other things. You might not build factories, but on the other hand you might if there were some advantages to doing so (rapid prototyping, flexible manufacturing, JIT with tighter chain) a company could do the right thing every once in a while.
But that's beside the point, point is you're going to need to use the money somewhere (and probably not in the tax haven where you're storing it). When you eventually move the money into whatever country you are going to use it in you'll have to pay taxes on it.
Sure, but it was money made outside the US to begin with anyway, right? I guess I don't have a real problem with it then being spent outside the US. I also question how much you can really spend outside the US which will be of any substantial benefit to the corporation or shareholders. Sure, you can buy some subsidiaries like Microsoft bought Minecraft but at the end of the day what are they going to do? probably make money? so you have just compounded your problem and now you are stockpiling even more money you can't use where you actually want to use it.
Ok, so that's kind of an interesting scheme. Except that someday that loan will come due and you'll have to repatriate the money to pay it off at which time you'd pay taxes, right? So at the end of the day you've just deferred them longer.
Yeah, I'm typically pegged by others as one of those 'tax and spend' types but really it seems to me that these corporations have become so adept at avoiding taxes that they don't actually contribute much at the high tax bracket they're in anyway. It might increase total revenue collection $ if we lowered the corporate tax and made it more cost effective for them to simply pay the tax than to avoid it.
Also, I still don't understand how having $100m in overseas reserves you can't really use adds much value for shareholders, sure it adds some but because of the cost of actually using the money it seems like the value it adds would be roughly the same as repatriating the money and paying the taxes on it in the first place.
Sure, but at the end of the day those expenses could otherwise just be paid for with a loan which could be repaid in a better year as a legitimate expense you could write off (plus write off the interest) so they're really not escaping anything they couldn't do anyway, right?
Oh I'm sure there are some games where you can repatriate some of it and avoid some taxes covering losses during poor periods of performance, etc. but at the end of the day it would seem to me that would only be a small fraction of the total amount held in these havens. It seems like a lot of it is just holding on to money for the sake of holding on to it, it's not enriching the shareholders to have such stockpiled money, nor is it enriching the executives, it mostly seems silly to me but I have far to much common sense to work in high finance.
I understand that part, what I don't get is what's the long game? They build a huge amount of capital in Ireland, Bermuda, the Caymans, etc. but then what? If they want to actually use that money for something in a country like the US they're going to have to pay taxes on it, no? Seems to me it's really a tax deferral strategy and not avoidance?
Disconnecting the inputs would be unexpected behavior... Most good KVM switches do not do that because it causes the system to reinitialize the video output each time which can present it's own set of issues, hence the popularity of EDID devices like the "DVI Detective". I think you'll have a hard time finding a KVM device (particularly a good one) which does not do EDID management. What's unclear is why this is a problem in your situation.
Since I don't own one or work for Aten I can't really check that for you but I think that you can do what you want which is to move keyboard and mouse control over to CPU4 but it may require multiple steps of switching things around. They are pretty clear in the manual that either screen can have KVM focus so you can flip KVM focus to the other screen and the two systems flip screens and then you can reassign the CPUs back to the original screens as you want them. Sure it's a pain but you're asking for something pretty unusual to begin with. You may be able to find something a lot more expensive that does exactly what you want or you could live with something like this which does what you want but maybe not as efficiently and for a lot less cost.
Remember that you don't need to find dual monitor inputs! Because you can route any input to any display you can use two different inputs for connections to a single PC. If you want to use that PC is dual monitor configuration you just route input 1 to output 1 and input 2 to output 2, just ignore the keyboard/mouse inputs on the second input and just use the video switching portion for the second screen. Note that you'll need to find one with at least 2x5 capability though for your two dual output PCs and one laptop.
The CM0264 is dual monitor output, see the description (2x4) though now that I read your description again I see you have 2 dual monitor PCs and not just one so you actually need a 2x5 matrix KVM switch. They're also available (may be 2x6 or something higher) but will probably be quite a bit more expensive. Now that you know what you want exists and what it's called though (matrix KVM) I imagine you can Google it yourself.
Yes, except if you care about latency, etc. I'm assuming this user knows what they're talking about and has specifically requested a KVM for a reason. For example trying to do graphic design work, video editing, CAD, or a lot of other things over VNC or any screengrabber is not really feasible. Even just typing a word processing document is a bit of a pain with the lag...
See the ATEN CM0264 for a specific example of what I think you're looking for.
What you want is called a matrix KVM switch. They exist, but they're quite expensive, do some Googling on matrix KVM switch and you'll see the options.
Yes, this. Read the article, they are talking about 400Mbps microwave links. That's a drop in the bucket compared with fiber bandwidth. This paper is all about latency above all else. First, I remain unconvinced that RF links are really different than fiber for latency. Second, I'm unconvinced very many people care about the difference of ~5ms in latency (using their numbers) and would consider bandwidth much more important. They point out one particular use case for low-latency, low-bandwidth links like this (high frequency trading) but for anything involving human interaction it seems like a non-issue.
I always smile when passing old long-lines towers on the road (or seeing them on top of central office buildings in large cities). You can get an idea of the size and scope of the network at http://long-lines.net/ which has some excellent maps such as http://i.imgur.com/HI0cMJ1.jpg showing the network.
I have given up trying to educate Slashdot readers about IPv6. Like most IT people they have stuck their heads in the sand and think NAT is the end-all-be-all. As an professor of IT I keep preaching knowing IPv6 to my students because someday IT management is going to wakeup to the fact that Asia (and other places) has moved on to IPv6 and if you want to do business with them you better be running it too. Then there will a rush to get everyone on IPv6 and people with experience will be in demand. So let them stick their heads in the sand, those of us who actually know the substantial advantages of IPv6 and are familiar with deploying and operating IPv6 networks will gladly be your highly compensated consultants when the day comes.
I don't know that it's really any more obscure than 3D modelling, desktop publishing, or any of the many other projects that get discussed on /. For those of us who work or dabble in music areas and appreciate being able FOSS MuseScore is really amazing software. It's also important for the education market where commercial software in the same genre can be very expensive. 1.x definitely has it's quirks but it's amazing (and important) to be able to at least compete on a basic level with Finale and Sibelius. I'm looking forward to trying out 2.0!
And if I want to cause you to have an accident in your pre-ECU car I can cause substantial damage with some wrenches and a minute. What's your real point? I want to maintain the ability to hack/modify my own vehicles. Encrypting bus communication would pretty much kill that unless their was a mandate to release the encryption keys to the vehicle owner (and then what about leased cars, financed cars, etc.) which is unlikely to happen. As long as it's not fully remotely exploitable (meaning you never have to have physical contact with my car) I'm not concerned.
This is exactly my own viewpoint. All of this is a bunch of stirred up nonsense. Yes, systems like OnStar which bridge between the CAN bus and the phone network need protection. What I absolutely do NOT want is to see encrypted communications that I as the owner cannot see in plaintext on a wired bus. This will put non-dealer mechanics out of business pretty quickly and/or drive up repair costs tremendously including effectively preventing me from working on my own car. I think it's a dream come true for dealers and manufacturers.
Yes, we need to prevent remote exploitation but I absolutely want to be able to hack and modify my own vehicle to my heart's content.
The requirement for physical access makes these so-called hacks against cars a non-starter for me. People have been cutting brake lines, loosening bolts, etc. on cars to harm people for a long time but we don't require hardened physical access to the car. This whole thing is way overblown by people trying to make headlines.
This, x1000. I would like to hear what use case this product has that is not already served by the many existing MIDI controllers. No serious keyboardist is going to play on a keyboard with a design like this.