Just use the Disk Utility tool (use Spotlight to find it;-)) and create yourself an encrypted image. Then all you do is double click to mount it when you want to throw some data in it. This is what I do instead of encrypting my entire home directory. Works like a charm.
I agree that the suggestion borders on extreme -- but it does make a very easy tally of who is frustrated with the dupes. I have zero knowledge of how Slashdot is administered, but if they are interested in finding out how many people care, they can watch how many people have Zonk unchecked.
What they really need is an option to moderate the stories themselves, not just the responses. And then apply karma to the authors...
The way I see it, a particular property should get exactly one bailout from the government. After that, it gets branded, kinda like a salvage title on a car. After that, no more bailouts, build at your own risk and with private insurance.
I share the frustration of having to repeatedly bail out people who then promptly go back and build there again. Especially the people who also have private insurance, and who make a lot more money than I do, but choose to live in a high risk area because of the spectacular view. Granted, this is more a Florida problem than a New Orleans one, but in my opinion the solution is the same.
Not a bad idea. Looks like a fair amount is going to get rebuilt, so it does seem like an opportunity to make it safer. Although there would be some interesting challenges dealing with the existing below-ground infrastructure.
Another thought I had is rebuilding the new buildings so that the first floors are parking only, designed specifically to take flooding without major damage. Also, no more building houses below see level, put them somewhere else. Some of this will undoubtedly be self-correcting, as the insurance companies are probably going to up their premiums significantly for anyone who insists on rebuilding in the area.
Aside from all the folks saying you can only have so many circuits, and the towers will blow down, and the wires will tear in the wind, etc. This is still a good question to ask. We are a high tech society, so presumably we could figure solutions to some of this?
Like...
1. Run hard wires underground to protect them from wind. Obviously some places already does this, and it has the side benefit of eliminating unsightly overhead wires.
2. Protect the underground wiring from water. We obviously know how to do this, otherwise we couldn't be running cables along the ocean floor.
3. Make cell towers more resistant to damage. A 175 mph wind sounds like a lot, but it is by no means something we cannot defend against. And put the generators for the towers up off the ground at least 25 feet. Also not difficult.
4. Come up with something better than fixed size circuits. Sure, I'd like my 64K voice channel when all is normal, but I'd get by with a lot less if all I needed to do was basic communication. Cell phone companies already do this with the wireless end of things. Now the phone companies have to finish implementing it on the hard lines.
Those are just thoughts off the top of my head. Perhaps I'm way off base, but I just don't see that there is any insurmountable difficulty in building a communications network capable of handling spikes in demand that far exceed its average usage. Is this what we get for letting capitalism alone decide what technology we use?
Both you and the parent of your post have made the same assumption -- most criminals are stupid, smart people do not commit crime.
Do you have any numbers to back that up? I regularly see this claim, and for the life of me I cannot figure out where people pull these numbers from.
If a criminal is never caught because he is smart enough to evade detection, how can his existence even be measured? Heck, perhaps 90% of all criminals are geniuses and we just don't know it.
I think the "smart people can usually find a better way to make a living than crime" statement is just a way of consoling yourself.
How do you decide which comes first? How about whichever section of code is bigger?
The GNU contribution to GNU/Linux is an order of magnitude greater than the Linux kernel. And almost all of your routine interaction with the operating system is GNU-centric. If you switched the kernel to something else, it would still be fundamentally the same experience. So I can see perfectly good logic for GNU/Linux instead of Linux/GNU.
Refusing to give GNU proper credit is to do them a great disservice, because it is their work that has predominantly shaped the operating system was have today that we flippantly call "Linux."
All you need to have is a removable hard drive. When the computer is to be secured, the hard drive must be removed and placed into a safe rated for Secret information.
I suppose this could be out of date information, but this is how we did it in the military in 1995. Just garden variety Gateway PC's at the time, but with a removable hard drive tray so we could through it in the safe. Even in '95 we no longer had to observe TEMPEST requirements for material classified Secret.
When was the last time we sent someone to the moon? The 60's. And the last time a supersonic plane was developed? The 60's.
Is it just money? Why else did we begin to achieve notable success in aerospace in the 60's, and then backslide to where we are now? By 2020 we hope to be back where we were in the 60's. Great.
We just took two Linux NFS servers out of production and replaced them with a Network Appliance. The primary reason was because the Linux servers would crash every couple of weeks. One one hard lock, and as the load shifted to the other, it would do the same. We did a LOT of diagnostics on these boxes, forced IBM to replace the hardware, talked with SuSE for many hours, talked with Polyserve even though they weren't really responsible for the NFS code, etc, etc.
Nobody could figure out what was going on. From watching the metrics, though, one thing was obvious -- the NFS kernel daemon has a memory leak of some flavor. It was churning through memory (2.5GB on each box) like it was going out of style. Periodically it would re-allocate existing memory and stall our NFS service for a few minutes, and after enough of these it would just up and lock altogether. Our only defense until we could get an alternative solution in place was to try and figure out a good time to reboot the boxes often enough to avoid the locks. This is supposed to be a UNIX-like operating system, not WINDOWS-like:-).
I'll grant you that the NetApp is not a Solaris box, but I can tell you from much past experience that I never once had a Solaris NFS server that would randomly lock up and crash just from serving NFS. This is a trait specific to Linux, because NFS on Linux is not sexy enough to warrant a lot of attention. The programmers who wrote it "mostly got it working" but didn't polish it off into something that was service provider ready.
On the bright side, some professional programmers are working on it. Polyserve has expressed their intent to polish the NFS daemon for Linux into something enterprise and service provider ready. They have incentive to do it, because NFS serving is a good application for their software.
This is just one example of a problem that open source development has. Something needs to be sexy before people will spend significant time on it. There is not a lot of reward for the ho-hum stuff, which includes non-coding stuff like documentation. In general I am a very strong supporter of open source (and most of the software I use to run our ISP is open source) -- but we need to recognize that not everything about it is perfect, and there are some issues that need to be addressed.
Since it was apparently quite easy to find the overclocking, and it is probably difficult to hide it from plain sight -- perhaps the reviewers should be routinely verifying all the clock rates & timings before they run their benchmarks. Instead of simply saying that "Motherboard A performed better than Motherboard B at the default settings", they should be saying "Motherboard A performed better than Motherboard B" with all clock rates and RAM timings set to stock specifications." And if they cannot set the BIOS in a way to meet the stock specifications, then the motherboard is defective and that should be noted.
The primary difference between Solaris and Linux is that Solaris implements fewer features, but they do all of them at 100%. Linux implements many more features, but very few of them are over 80% finished. Don't get me started on Linux' NFS...
1. A tire blowout at 85 is not markedly different than at 55. Seriously. At least if you're driving a modern car.
2. Up to a point, which occurs well into the triple digits, imperfections in the road become less noticable the faster you go. A pothole that will cause you to wreck at 85 will be worse at 55.
3. If you swerve hard enough to miss a rabbit that you lose control of the car, then you need to reevaluate your decision making skills. Some things you do not swerve for, because doing so at any speed is more dangerous than just hitting it. Use the brakes.
I think that as a general rule 85-90 mph for most modern cars is safer than 55. It's fast enough that most people will finally put both hands on the wheel, and they won't talk on the cell phone, drink a cup of coffee, or read the newspaper. You pay more attention at that speed.
With the ever increasing traffic on freeways these days, I don't think we should continue to cater to the lowest common denominator. If necessary, create a "pass" system so that only qualified drivers & cars can get on the freeways in the first place. I don't like government intrusion into my life, but I'd suffer through that just to have a smoother commute.
Is this an effort to see if we can exceed the number of comments for the intelligent design/evolution thread yesterday? It's a good start, but I'm not sure if it'll make it... the article is such an obvious troll, it's embarassing to see it get the airtime on such a well-visited forum as Slashdot. There are closed-minded haters/bigots/etc on both sides of the issue, and all of them should be ignored. Cut the 10% most extreme from either end and the rest of us can have an intelligent conversation.
If you think working hard will get you ahead, then you have not been working in corporate America. Kissing ass, schmoozing, and making friends is how you get ahead. The old saying, "It's not WHAT you know, it's WHO you know" is very true.
Hating your job may not be the right answer, but either is being an overachiever. See your job for what it is -- a means to an end. Work your 40 hours a week, make sure you go out for beer regularly with the boss, and watch your career advance.
If you wanted one, you could buy it for 1500 bucks. It costs 500 bucks to get into the developer program so you're eligible to buy one in the first place, and a thousand bucks for the machine itself.
I've thought about it...
Are you one of the folks that criticizes things you haven't even tried?
I just connected to a Windows server with my Mac a couple days ago (over a VPN even). And let me tell you, it was easier than doing it under Windows. And it goes without saying that it was orders of magnitude easier than under Linux.
And to use another example -- the firewall was trivial to setup. I want SSH, I check SSH. Does it get much easier than that? Certainly not under Windows.
It took me a long time to get up the nerve to give Macs a try -- I've been a long time bigot, turned against Apple since the days of the original Macintosh. Now that I have my Mac Mini, I've got to hand it to Apple -- Mac OS X is several times better in every respect than Windows, and an order of magnitude better (as a desktop OS) than Linux. The truth hurts, but that is it. I'm still a big fan of Linux, even on the desktop, and I'm seriously hoping it does some catching up -- because I can't ever go back to Windows, if for any reason Apple should go away.
You started with a Duron, which means you started low. If everyone did that, sure we could upgrade several times. And most motherboards that supported old Athlons (like the 1333) did not support the faster XP procs even with a BIOS upgrade.
So basically all you're saying is that -your- purchasing style involves upgrades. The rest of us, who tend to buy at the sweet spot or upper end, not the low end, have to upgrade the motherboard and usually the memory when we upgrade the CPU.
They can whine all they want, but the issue is entirely different. The days are long gone when land lines were measured rate for inbound calls. In the case of cell phones, that is still reality. Until cell phones become uniformly flat-rate, all the lobbying in the world will not grant marketers the right to call cell phones.
(and this is perhaps a good argument for why cell phones should remain measured rate indefinitely)
You're just as bad, speaking in absolutes. What he said IS true IN SOME STATES. And NOT true IN SOME STATES.
In addition to Washington, as mentioned by someone else who responded to your post, Oregon also does not consider a traffic infraction a criminal offense. It's a simple ordinance violation, below class C misdemeanor. If they were misdemeanors, you'd have the luxury of requiring a higher standard of proof -- beyond a resonable doubt. Because they are civil and not criminal, the standard is only preponderance of the evidence.
It's worth remembering that just having a firewall does not protect you from everything. All it does is basic protection. If you allow RDP from any source through your firewall, then you are still vulnerable to any RDP exploit. The firewall is not protecting the traffic, only the TCP connection. If you really want to be protected, use a firewall for NAT only, and do not map any ports back to your inside box. Or unplug your box from the 'net altogether.
Brand loyalty is for morons, but this is about more than just a brand. This is about open vs closed source, free vs not free. If Microsoft wants to make IE open source, I will actually consider their browser. As long as it stays closed, it has to meet a much higher "apparent" standard of quality & security than Firefox does in order to get me interested in switching. While IE is closed, I worry about what security bugs haven't been found yet, and whether nor not MS will get to them in time. At least with Firefox I know two things -- first, the bugs are likely to be found more quickly, and second, it's beyond doubt that the bugs that are found are fixed much, much faster.
Really? I just did some research and it appears that HD-DVD will use H.264, while Blu-Ray will use MPEG-2. As I understand it, the comparison is 7-8 Mb/sec for H.264 vs 12-20 Mb/sec for Blu-Ray (same quality video).
This would seem to eliminate the capacity argument for Blu-Ray. And Toshiba has created a three-layer HD-DVD, which has a 45GB capacity... which is very close to Blu-Ray. From my standpoint, HD-DVD is looking like the technologically superior choice.
No judgement of guilt or innocence is indicated in such cases. They are simply (for all intents and purposes) set aside.
For all intents and purposes? Huh?
If a criminal gets off, technicality or not, he is found "not guilty". Does this not imply "innocent"? If not, then what does "innocent until proven guilty" mean? I don't see a third choice...
Excellent. Go back and use it then, and delete Firefox from your system and forget it ever existed.
Your comment does not make this whole argument any more rational...
I do not see what the big deal is anyway, has ICANN really done a bad job? Why change something that is working, in favor of something else unproven?
And as for the root nameservers... I'm less worried than that. As long as there is a full set of root servers in the United States, in case we need to cut ourselves loose if the rest of the DNS infrastructure is being successfully attacked.
Slashdot Mirror
Just use the Disk Utility tool (use Spotlight to find it ;-)) and create yourself an encrypted image. Then all you do is double click to mount it when you want to throw some data in it. This is what I do instead of encrypting my entire home directory. Works like a charm.
What they really need is an option to moderate the stories themselves, not just the responses. And then apply karma to the authors...
The way I see it, a particular property should get exactly one bailout from the government. After that, it gets branded, kinda like a salvage title on a car. After that, no more bailouts, build at your own risk and with private insurance.
I share the frustration of having to repeatedly bail out people who then promptly go back and build there again. Especially the people who also have private insurance, and who make a lot more money than I do, but choose to live in a high risk area because of the spectacular view. Granted, this is more a Florida problem than a New Orleans one, but in my opinion the solution is the same.
Another thought I had is rebuilding the new buildings so that the first floors are parking only, designed specifically to take flooding without major damage. Also, no more building houses below see level, put them somewhere else. Some of this will undoubtedly be self-correcting, as the insurance companies are probably going to up their premiums significantly for anyone who insists on rebuilding in the area.
Like ...
1. Run hard wires underground to protect them from wind. Obviously some places already does this, and it has the side benefit of eliminating unsightly overhead wires.
2. Protect the underground wiring from water. We obviously know how to do this, otherwise we couldn't be running cables along the ocean floor.
3. Make cell towers more resistant to damage. A 175 mph wind sounds like a lot, but it is by no means something we cannot defend against. And put the generators for the towers up off the ground at least 25 feet. Also not difficult.
4. Come up with something better than fixed size circuits. Sure, I'd like my 64K voice channel when all is normal, but I'd get by with a lot less if all I needed to do was basic communication. Cell phone companies already do this with the wireless end of things. Now the phone companies have to finish implementing it on the hard lines.
Those are just thoughts off the top of my head. Perhaps I'm way off base, but I just don't see that there is any insurmountable difficulty in building a communications network capable of handling spikes in demand that far exceed its average usage. Is this what we get for letting capitalism alone decide what technology we use?
Do you have any numbers to back that up? I regularly see this claim, and for the life of me I cannot figure out where people pull these numbers from.
If a criminal is never caught because he is smart enough to evade detection, how can his existence even be measured? Heck, perhaps 90% of all criminals are geniuses and we just don't know it.
I think the "smart people can usually find a better way to make a living than crime" statement is just a way of consoling yourself.
The GNU contribution to GNU/Linux is an order of magnitude greater than the Linux kernel. And almost all of your routine interaction with the operating system is GNU-centric. If you switched the kernel to something else, it would still be fundamentally the same experience. So I can see perfectly good logic for GNU/Linux instead of Linux/GNU.
Refusing to give GNU proper credit is to do them a great disservice, because it is their work that has predominantly shaped the operating system was have today that we flippantly call "Linux."
All you need to have is a removable hard drive. When the computer is to be secured, the hard drive must be removed and placed into a safe rated for Secret information.
I suppose this could be out of date information, but this is how we did it in the military in 1995. Just garden variety Gateway PC's at the time, but with a removable hard drive tray so we could through it in the safe. Even in '95 we no longer had to observe TEMPEST requirements for material classified Secret.
When was the last time we sent someone to the moon? The 60's. And the last time a supersonic plane was developed? The 60's. Is it just money? Why else did we begin to achieve notable success in aerospace in the 60's, and then backslide to where we are now? By 2020 we hope to be back where we were in the 60's. Great.
Nobody could figure out what was going on. From watching the metrics, though, one thing was obvious -- the NFS kernel daemon has a memory leak of some flavor. It was churning through memory (2.5GB on each box) like it was going out of style. Periodically it would re-allocate existing memory and stall our NFS service for a few minutes, and after enough of these it would just up and lock altogether. Our only defense until we could get an alternative solution in place was to try and figure out a good time to reboot the boxes often enough to avoid the locks. This is supposed to be a UNIX-like operating system, not WINDOWS-like :-).
I'll grant you that the NetApp is not a Solaris box, but I can tell you from much past experience that I never once had a Solaris NFS server that would randomly lock up and crash just from serving NFS. This is a trait specific to Linux, because NFS on Linux is not sexy enough to warrant a lot of attention. The programmers who wrote it "mostly got it working" but didn't polish it off into something that was service provider ready. On the bright side, some professional programmers are working on it. Polyserve has expressed their intent to polish the NFS daemon for Linux into something enterprise and service provider ready. They have incentive to do it, because NFS serving is a good application for their software.
This is just one example of a problem that open source development has. Something needs to be sexy before people will spend significant time on it. There is not a lot of reward for the ho-hum stuff, which includes non-coding stuff like documentation. In general I am a very strong supporter of open source (and most of the software I use to run our ISP is open source) -- but we need to recognize that not everything about it is perfect, and there are some issues that need to be addressed.
Since it was apparently quite easy to find the overclocking, and it is probably difficult to hide it from plain sight -- perhaps the reviewers should be routinely verifying all the clock rates & timings before they run their benchmarks. Instead of simply saying that "Motherboard A performed better than Motherboard B at the default settings", they should be saying "Motherboard A performed better than Motherboard B" with all clock rates and RAM timings set to stock specifications." And if they cannot set the BIOS in a way to meet the stock specifications, then the motherboard is defective and that should be noted.
The primary difference between Solaris and Linux is that Solaris implements fewer features, but they do all of them at 100%. Linux implements many more features, but very few of them are over 80% finished. Don't get me started on Linux' NFS...
1. A tire blowout at 85 is not markedly different than at 55. Seriously. At least if you're driving a modern car.
2. Up to a point, which occurs well into the triple digits, imperfections in the road become less noticable the faster you go. A pothole that will cause you to wreck at 85 will be worse at 55.
3. If you swerve hard enough to miss a rabbit that you lose control of the car, then you need to reevaluate your decision making skills. Some things you do not swerve for, because doing so at any speed is more dangerous than just hitting it. Use the brakes.
I think that as a general rule 85-90 mph for most modern cars is safer than 55. It's fast enough that most people will finally put both hands on the wheel, and they won't talk on the cell phone, drink a cup of coffee, or read the newspaper. You pay more attention at that speed.
With the ever increasing traffic on freeways these days, I don't think we should continue to cater to the lowest common denominator. If necessary, create a "pass" system so that only qualified drivers & cars can get on the freeways in the first place. I don't like government intrusion into my life, but I'd suffer through that just to have a smoother commute.
Is this an effort to see if we can exceed the number of comments for the intelligent design/evolution thread yesterday? It's a good start, but I'm not sure if it'll make it... the article is such an obvious troll, it's embarassing to see it get the airtime on such a well-visited forum as Slashdot. There are closed-minded haters/bigots/etc on both sides of the issue, and all of them should be ignored. Cut the 10% most extreme from either end and the rest of us can have an intelligent conversation.
Hating your job may not be the right answer, but either is being an overachiever. See your job for what it is -- a means to an end. Work your 40 hours a week, make sure you go out for beer regularly with the boss, and watch your career advance.
If you wanted one, you could buy it for 1500 bucks. It costs 500 bucks to get into the developer program so you're eligible to buy one in the first place, and a thousand bucks for the machine itself. I've thought about it...
I just connected to a Windows server with my Mac a couple days ago (over a VPN even). And let me tell you, it was easier than doing it under Windows. And it goes without saying that it was orders of magnitude easier than under Linux.
And to use another example -- the firewall was trivial to setup. I want SSH, I check SSH. Does it get much easier than that? Certainly not under Windows.
It took me a long time to get up the nerve to give Macs a try -- I've been a long time bigot, turned against Apple since the days of the original Macintosh. Now that I have my Mac Mini, I've got to hand it to Apple -- Mac OS X is several times better in every respect than Windows, and an order of magnitude better (as a desktop OS) than Linux. The truth hurts, but that is it. I'm still a big fan of Linux, even on the desktop, and I'm seriously hoping it does some catching up -- because I can't ever go back to Windows, if for any reason Apple should go away.
So basically all you're saying is that -your- purchasing style involves upgrades. The rest of us, who tend to buy at the sweet spot or upper end, not the low end, have to upgrade the motherboard and usually the memory when we upgrade the CPU.
(and this is perhaps a good argument for why cell phones should remain measured rate indefinitely)
In addition to Washington, as mentioned by someone else who responded to your post, Oregon also does not consider a traffic infraction a criminal offense. It's a simple ordinance violation, below class C misdemeanor. If they were misdemeanors, you'd have the luxury of requiring a higher standard of proof -- beyond a resonable doubt. Because they are civil and not criminal, the standard is only preponderance of the evidence.
It's worth remembering that just having a firewall does not protect you from everything. All it does is basic protection. If you allow RDP from any source through your firewall, then you are still vulnerable to any RDP exploit. The firewall is not protecting the traffic, only the TCP connection. If you really want to be protected, use a firewall for NAT only, and do not map any ports back to your inside box. Or unplug your box from the 'net altogether.
Brand loyalty is for morons, but this is about more than just a brand. This is about open vs closed source, free vs not free. If Microsoft wants to make IE open source, I will actually consider their browser. As long as it stays closed, it has to meet a much higher "apparent" standard of quality & security than Firefox does in order to get me interested in switching. While IE is closed, I worry about what security bugs haven't been found yet, and whether nor not MS will get to them in time. At least with Firefox I know two things -- first, the bugs are likely to be found more quickly, and second, it's beyond doubt that the bugs that are found are fixed much, much faster.
This would seem to eliminate the capacity argument for Blu-Ray. And Toshiba has created a three-layer HD-DVD, which has a 45GB capacity ... which is very close to Blu-Ray. From my standpoint, HD-DVD is looking like the technologically superior choice.
For all intents and purposes? Huh? If a criminal gets off, technicality or not, he is found "not guilty". Does this not imply "innocent"? If not, then what does "innocent until proven guilty" mean? I don't see a third choice...
Your comment does not make this whole argument any more rational...
I do not see what the big deal is anyway, has ICANN really done a bad job? Why change something that is working, in favor of something else unproven?
And as for the root nameservers... I'm less worried than that. As long as there is a full set of root servers in the United States, in case we need to cut ourselves loose if the rest of the DNS infrastructure is being successfully attacked.