Once again, RAID is not for backup purposes. Having a mirrored RAID means you can still use your machine if one hard drive dies. A lot of good your flash drive will do you if your hard drive dies and you need to finish that presentation on the flight. Unless someone's kind enough to loan you *their* laptop so you can keep working, you're going to be screwed. And if you're really lucky they might also have OpenOffice.org installed so that you can open your files. Hopefully you're not doing anything more complex than typically office stuff or you're really fubared. Wouldn't you have rather put up with a few extra ounces to have that reliability in the first place?
And really, iPods come with huge hard drives and most people have no problem lugging those around on top of everything else. As for burning your leg, you would have burnt your leg severely on those room-sized computers they had decades ago. Fortunately, technology matures from the heavy, slow, and inefficient and becomes light, fast, and efficient. So what was once thought of as stupid becomes commonplace and expected.
If you have data that important on a laptop, it should be backed up to something else-- DVD, thumbdrive, pocket-size USB HDD, etc. Having a second drive in the laptop means that whatever ills befall your laptop, also befall your backup.
RAID doesn't replace a backup. You still need to run backups. All it means is that if one drive fails, you can still keep working as it won't affect the entire machine.
Which would you rather have?
A single hard drive, fully backed up, such that if it were to fail you would suffer a 100% loss in productivity on your system until you had a chance to replace the drive and rebuild everything. Or...
Two hard drives configured in a mirror, also fully backed up, such that if one drive failed the other drive takes up the slack and you can finish whatever you were working on. Later, you take the laptop in for service to replace the damaged drive having lost zero productivity in the meantime.
Um... redundancy? A backup is great until your hard drive dies, then you have a useless hunk of metal while you source a new drive, restore from backup, etc.
And hey, programmers can use that as ammunition when going to a job interview. "Well, I'm certainly interested in your offer but I'm currently in my third round of interviews with a certain large company that I'm under NDA not to mention [wink, wink]... is there anything you can do to sweeten the deal?" People can imply that it's Google, but in reality if that job offer doesn't pan out, the large company might end up being Walmart.
What does it matter what they say? They're trying to spin this in the most favorable way to themselves and redefining a commonly acceptable term (fork) to mean something which it doesn't. Objectively, the codebase will branch out into two (or more) separate efforts. Pop quiz: what does one call such a branch?
Your post also described the price of air. Yes, breathing air is free, but as long as you're willing to expend the energy required to flex various muscles resulting in the lungs expanding and inhaling air. And you'll also need to drink water and ingest food -- which you'll need to purchase or grow. If you grow your own, you'll probably need to either purchase or fashion the tools required to till the soil and plant the seeds. So yes, air is free if you're willing to cover all those costs.
In that case what is the point of sending out the "You were duped" message after you've already got the personal info? It just doesn't make any sense WHY the phishers would send out the second mail.
Re-read my post -- there is no second email, just a post-submission webpage. The idea is to make it seem like it's a security review sponsored by the company and that they shouldn't discuss it with anyone else so that it goes mostly unreported. Perhaps even solicit the cooperation of the management so that if the sharp people do report it, even the managers will tell them that it's just a security review and to ignore it... but "don't tell anyone else because we need to find out if people are susceptible to these tricks". That'd be the best social engineering.
Secondly, fake or not, the warning about it being a security audit will have the same effect as the real training; people will be much less likely to fall for phishing again.
Note that with spear phishing, they're targeting individual companies with specific messages. All they care is to get the gullible people once and that they maximize their exposure window. If they get the information the first time, they won't need to re-target the same company.
I was thinking the same thing. Here's how it goes: phisher sets up a site which looks like a company web page (or bank login, or whatever) and asks people for their login, password, SSN, and whatever other information. Those who know better ignore the page, but the people who are gullible enter their information diligently. They hit submit and see a result page which says something like:
"This is a security audit conducted by an outside firm and none of your information has been stored. Had this been a real attack, criminals would now be in possession of your information. A security meeting to review corporate information security policy is scheduled for next Friday at 10:30am and you will receive more details when the location is finalized. As we wish to make this security sweep as objective as possible, it is imperative that you DO NOT DISCUSS this with your other coworkers or anyone in management. Thank you, ACME Security Consultants -- retained by [insert CIO's name], CIO, [insert company name]."
So you maximize the possible number of responses, minimize further discussion to alert others to the fake nature of the email, and by the time people are wondering... "Wasn't there a meeting about this?"... it's too late and the phishers have what they need.
Why not wait until Google actually announces what it is going to do?
How else will "news" sites generate readership if not through controversial and unsubstantiated rumors so that they can gain a membership and sell the ability to display ads to those members? You see, by posting stories like this, Slashdot generates a lot more traffic and makes money because they can turn to advertisers and say "See? People just like nacturation and Spy Hunter come to this site and you can show your ads to them. Only $X per thousand unique."
So the thing to take home here, kids, is that if you dislike a topic the best way to combat it is to just not click through to the story or post at all. Deny websites the advertising statistics that they need to fund the site to further peddle trash to you. Slashdot editor "michael" may have been hated, but what better way to increase the ad impressions than by having him make flamebait comments? Sure, it may anger some but in the same way that Microsoft considers legal challenges the cost of doing business, Slashdot makes more money from people like him (despite a few who may leave) than they would from being a level-headed, objective source of typo-free, edited news.
If memory serves, the very first issue of Game Developer Magazine had an article on this and the author used genetic algorithms to calculate the most optimal thrust force vectors and durations to use. The simulation arrived at a very optimal solution in almost no time at all -- and it was for simulating an n-body problem, where n is much greater than 2. Maybe someone can find the original article somewhere, but here's some links which seem to be quite relevant.
Well if you're going to be pedantic, flexible refers to how far you can bend something without breaking it.
To be really pedantic, comparing operating systems to iron and spaghetti is quite the stretch. Flexible also means "ability to change", which is much more relevant to software without having to combine metallurgy with one's culinary skills.
So it's irrelevant how many people are coding the ports (aka force). It matters how far you can bend (aka port) the software before it breaks.
Given that porting involves working to fix where it is broken -- not port a working OS until it breaks -- I think your analogy is wrong. More resources means more things get done. Granted, a software's portability is affected by its design, but 1000 people working on a moderately portable piece of software can port it to more environments than 1 person working on highly portable software.
What does your post have to do with the parent post other than that you wanted it to appear high on the comments page? Your post is neither funny nor interesting and should be modded overrated because you don't have the balls to start your own thread.
Slashdot Mirror
Battery life? Nah, all you need is a portable Mr. Fusion!
"I think there is a world market for maybe five computers."
- Thomas Watson, Chairman of IBM, 1943
"Computers in the future may weigh no more than one-and-a-half tonnes."
- Popular Mechanics, 1949
"And how much will that monster weigh?"
- snarkh, 2005
Once again, RAID is not for backup purposes. Having a mirrored RAID means you can still use your machine if one hard drive dies. A lot of good your flash drive will do you if your hard drive dies and you need to finish that presentation on the flight. Unless someone's kind enough to loan you *their* laptop so you can keep working, you're going to be screwed. And if you're really lucky they might also have OpenOffice.org installed so that you can open your files. Hopefully you're not doing anything more complex than typically office stuff or you're really fubared. Wouldn't you have rather put up with a few extra ounces to have that reliability in the first place?
And really, iPods come with huge hard drives and most people have no problem lugging those around on top of everything else. As for burning your leg, you would have burnt your leg severely on those room-sized computers they had decades ago. Fortunately, technology matures from the heavy, slow, and inefficient and becomes light, fast, and efficient. So what was once thought of as stupid becomes commonplace and expected.
RAID doesn't replace a backup. You still need to run backups. All it means is that if one drive fails, you can still keep working as it won't affect the entire machine.
Which would you rather have?
- A single hard drive, fully backed up, such that if it were to fail you would suffer a 100% loss in productivity on your system until you had a chance to replace the drive and rebuild everything. Or...
- Two hard drives configured in a mirror, also fully backed up, such that if one drive failed the other drive takes up the slack and you can finish whatever you were working on. Later, you take the laptop in for service to replace the damaged drive having lost zero productivity in the meantime.
I know which I would choose.Um... redundancy? A backup is great until your hard drive dies, then you have a useless hunk of metal while you source a new drive, restore from backup, etc.
BTW, I'll humbly mention that I predicted this a year and a half ago, so at least there's prior art should they patent "RAID on a laptop".
And hey, programmers can use that as ammunition when going to a job interview. "Well, I'm certainly interested in your offer but I'm currently in my third round of interviews with a certain large company that I'm under NDA not to mention [wink, wink]... is there anything you can do to sweeten the deal?" People can imply that it's Google, but in reality if that job offer doesn't pan out, the large company might end up being Walmart.
And what do many powerplants burn to make electricity? Oil. When we run out of oil we'll have power shortages unless it's prepared for.
That's okay... when we run out of oil, just think of all the books we'll have available to burn.
What does it matter what they say? They're trying to spin this in the most favorable way to themselves and redefining a commonly acceptable term (fork) to mean something which it doesn't. Objectively, the codebase will branch out into two (or more) separate efforts. Pop quiz: what does one call such a branch?
In Soviet Russia, fur-hat-wearing overlord, for one, welcomes you?
About a year ago, a dead grandmother got a C&D letter from the RIAA.
Is that a Cist & Deceased letter?
Since it'll take me more than 2 seconds to calculate the optimal search term for googling the price, how much is their GSM base station?
Your post also described the price of air. Yes, breathing air is free, but as long as you're willing to expend the energy required to flex various muscles resulting in the lungs expanding and inhaling air. And you'll also need to drink water and ingest food -- which you'll need to purchase or grow. If you grow your own, you'll probably need to either purchase or fashion the tools required to till the soil and plant the seeds. So yes, air is free if you're willing to cover all those costs.
In that case what is the point of sending out the "You were duped" message after you've already got the personal info? It just doesn't make any sense WHY the phishers would send out the second mail.
Re-read my post -- there is no second email, just a post-submission webpage. The idea is to make it seem like it's a security review sponsored by the company and that they shouldn't discuss it with anyone else so that it goes mostly unreported. Perhaps even solicit the cooperation of the management so that if the sharp people do report it, even the managers will tell them that it's just a security review and to ignore it... but "don't tell anyone else because we need to find out if people are susceptible to these tricks". That'd be the best social engineering.
Personally, I prefer the phrase "carpe carp" -- seize the fish.
Secondly, fake or not, the warning about it being a security audit will have the same effect as the real training; people will be much less likely to fall for phishing again.
Note that with spear phishing, they're targeting individual companies with specific messages. All they care is to get the gullible people once and that they maximize their exposure window. If they get the information the first time, they won't need to re-target the same company.
Well, it does seem... curiously familiar.
Thanks to some exhaustive data tracking, most of the duped currency was removed from the economy by Sunday.
I wish slashdot would employ some of this exhaustive data tracking to its stories.
I was thinking the same thing. Here's how it goes: phisher sets up a site which looks like a company web page (or bank login, or whatever) and asks people for their login, password, SSN, and whatever other information. Those who know better ignore the page, but the people who are gullible enter their information diligently. They hit submit and see a result page which says something like:
"This is a security audit conducted by an outside firm and none of your information has been stored. Had this been a real attack, criminals would now be in possession of your information. A security meeting to review corporate information security policy is scheduled for next Friday at 10:30am and you will receive more details when the location is finalized. As we wish to make this security sweep as objective as possible, it is imperative that you DO NOT DISCUSS this with your other coworkers or anyone in management. Thank you, ACME Security Consultants -- retained by [insert CIO's name], CIO, [insert company name]."
So you maximize the possible number of responses, minimize further discussion to alert others to the fake nature of the email, and by the time people are wondering... "Wasn't there a meeting about this?"... it's too late and the phishers have what they need.
Less angles than a sextant. No turnip twaddler. Lame.
Why not wait until Google actually announces what it is going to do?
How else will "news" sites generate readership if not through controversial and unsubstantiated rumors so that they can gain a membership and sell the ability to display ads to those members? You see, by posting stories like this, Slashdot generates a lot more traffic and makes money because they can turn to advertisers and say "See? People just like nacturation and Spy Hunter come to this site and you can show your ads to them. Only $X per thousand unique."
So the thing to take home here, kids, is that if you dislike a topic the best way to combat it is to just not click through to the story or post at all. Deny websites the advertising statistics that they need to fund the site to further peddle trash to you. Slashdot editor "michael" may have been hated, but what better way to increase the ad impressions than by having him make flamebait comments? Sure, it may anger some but in the same way that Microsoft considers legal challenges the cost of doing business, Slashdot makes more money from people like him (despite a few who may leave) than they would from being a level-headed, objective source of typo-free, edited news.
If memory serves, the very first issue of Game Developer Magazine had an article on this and the author used genetic algorithms to calculate the most optimal thrust force vectors and durations to use. The simulation arrived at a very optimal solution in almost no time at all -- and it was for simulating an n-body problem, where n is much greater than 2. Maybe someone can find the original article somewhere, but here's some links which seem to be quite relevant.
from whence comes this discrepancy ?
Aforementioned discrepancy cometh from thine arse, which be white as the first winter snow.
Microsoft IIS caches the gzipped versions of static files and only recompresses when the original changes.
Well if you're going to be pedantic, flexible refers to how far you can bend something without breaking it.
To be really pedantic, comparing operating systems to iron and spaghetti is quite the stretch. Flexible also means "ability to change", which is much more relevant to software without having to combine metallurgy with one's culinary skills.
So it's irrelevant how many people are coding the ports (aka force). It matters how far you can bend (aka port) the software before it breaks.
Given that porting involves working to fix where it is broken -- not port a working OS until it breaks -- I think your analogy is wrong. More resources means more things get done. Granted, a software's portability is affected by its design, but 1000 people working on a moderately portable piece of software can port it to more environments than 1 person working on highly portable software.
What does your post have to do with the parent post other than that you wanted it to appear high on the comments page? Your post is neither funny nor interesting and should be modded overrated because you don't have the balls to start your own thread.