It's actually quite useful if you have something which monitors those files. No open CM ticket for a server, but you suddenly see someone logged in and making changes? Sound an alarm..history shows you everything a user types as soon as they type it (even modifying the shell to keep 0 history would show up initially). We use splunk to monitor it, and also monitor/etc for any changes to system files. It's lightweight and has helped us find a number of issues before.
This is true, however some databases simply aren't compatible with local firewalls. Oracle for instance requires your server to be more or less wide open (request comes in on one port, a response is sent back indicating the port to actually communicate on, then the client resends the query to that new port - so, more or less all ports have to be unblocked). This is where stuff like centralized authentication, nagios, monitoring of the/home/*/.history files, etc comes in useful. Sometimes local firewalls simply aren't an option.
From the sounds of it, you're discussing disabling a software firewall, not an actual hardware firewall. There's a lot of applications which require local firewalls to be disabled - for instance, we disable local firewalls when we're deploying telephony application servers because of vendor requirements. Likewise, some applications require SELinux to be disabled as well. All of our servers are still collectively behind a firewall, and beyond that we have a number of ACLs and centralized authentication controlling them. As for not running a firewall being lazy - firewalls are tools. Sometimes they're the right one, and sometimes they aren't. The only way to tell is experience on when to use each tool (and budget too). The more time you spend with networking, the more you'll come to realize that. But since you're learning, stick to what you've been told until you master it. As Picasso said, "learn the rules like a pro, so you can break them like an artist."
I have not RTFA, however, one thing that should be noted is Iron Dome is also built specifically to not intercept a large number of incoming projectiles. It monitors incoming trajectories and calculates approximately where they will land. If it is somewhere such as a field, it is ignored. If it will land in an urban center, it intercepts.
Hey, do you happen to have any info on that Russian NOTAM? I can't seem to find it anywhere, and I have no idea what the russian equivalent of "NOTAM" is... googling NOTAM just brings up the FAA warnings.
FYI, Iranians are not the biggest sponsors of "Islamic terrorists." That would be Saudi Arabia (and per some friends who are in military intel, UAE is up there too). Remember, sectarian divisions are very real in the extremist community. Iranians are predominantly Shia, whereas Jihadi terrorists are predominantly Sunni. That's not to say that there's not some mixing - which there most certainly is - but by no means are they a majority. The reality is actually the opposite of what you'd expect, considering Shi'ites have a big focus on martyrdom because of the the death of Hussein Ali. Otherwise, I agree with the rest of what you have to say. Ciao!
That's wonderful for future reference. However it doesn't help me when posting before it becomes common knowledge. I was more interested in trying to figure out where exactly the plane would have been attacked.
In that case, it sounds like they got a new weapons system and had no damn idea how to ID what they were shooting at, and brought down a plane they didn't intend to.
Ooof, I didn't see that article. Here's the great circle route, and it looks like it went right along the north/eastern borders of Ukraine. http://www.greatcirclemapper.n...
I'm not sure. It was at 32000 feet when they last had contact, which means it wasn't quite at cruising altitude, but it was still several miles up. The 777's cruising speed is mach.84, about 630 MPH. I'm not going to do the math (i'd love it if one of you aerospace guys would, especially since we know where it landed and the last known altitude and the great circle between Schipol and Kuala Lumpur), but I think it would be safe to say that on the ascent it would be going about 350-450 MPH. I can't see terrorists getting their hands on that kind of hardware. Both Ukraine and Russia on the other hand...
Some drugs do lead to brain damage. For instance, there was a study (later retracted) which showed 3,4 MDMA caused brain damage in recreational doses in rhesus monkeys. The study was retracted because the chemical provider had goofed, and provided pure reagent grade methamphetamine instead of MDMA. So, while MDMA was clinically safe, it put a BIG warning sign on meth, and for good reason.
"A balanced set of headphones are technically superior to an unbalanced set if perfect sound reproduction is your metric."
Given that the job of headphones is to reproduce the soundwaves indicated by an audio source, I'm pretty sure that is the only metric that matters. Or, tell me, why should we pay hundreds of dollars for equipment that can't reproduce sound properly?
You do realize that classical music is used for rating headphones, yes? It's not because I listen to it exclusively, it's because it provides opportunities to see if there is enough clarity and definition of sound to do things like determine if you can tell violins from violas from cellos, or tell the horns apart. Read professional headphone reviews. It's not a matter of "superiority," it's stated because it's a tool in determining quality. Given you didn't know that, I'm pretty sure most of your other points are moot about determining fidelity. I'd rebut your statement about frequency response, but I think this image does a much better job. You sound like you're A) butthurt because someone is saying a brand you don't like is technically inferior, and B) like you simply have no idea what you're talking about.
Wow, way to have a completely tangential conversation. Sorry if I pissed in your punch, but your generalizations about music tastes of the populace, and desires of the market while completely ignoring actual facts about the hardware make me pretty sure you need to reread what slashdot is - news for nerds. Some of us are audiophiles. Some of us are musicians. Some of us are sound techs. A lot of us DO care about those numbers on the back of the box, and what they translate to when you experience the music. I'd rather pay for balanced headphones which can listen to anything and sound incredible for a fraction of the price than pad some business man's pockets for selling a subpar product. But hey, keep justifying spending too much for an inferior product to yourself. No one is saying "I am superior because I buy a different brand than you," I'm saying that this product is inferior for a number of technical reasons. Please join the conversation that is actually going on, not the one you want to have. Thank you.
They're really not that great. They're built for a single type of music (things that go thump). Try listening to something like an Opera or a Symphony and they'll quickly fall to shambles. They're unbalanced, there's no definition of sound, the soundstage is only decent on the low end, the frequency response is worse than you can find on most earbuds... they're pretty bad. And they're overpriced.
I wanted to try Kiva, but I had no interest in seeing a lot of risk and no benefit. They didn't provide any interest to you for lending your money, but you assumed risk if the person you loaned to didn't pay them back. Has that changed?
Seriously, that's what I'd like to know. Kiva allowed you to donate, but you couldn't make a profit off the loans you provided. So, what about this? Can I back a loan and earn interest off of it? I love the idea of this if it could be turned into an 'everyone wins' situation - i make money, the business person starts a business and makes money, the broker in the middle makes money.
I feel the same way! I have the ability to disable ads but I never bother. If people are looking to monetize their website and they offer a decent enough product for me to go there over and over I don't mind them making some money for their efforts.
You really need to learn US history a bit better. About US training and sending people to kill protesters, google "Kent State massacre." About the US invading and rigging an election, google "Operation AJAX" and learn a heck of a lot about why almost every country in the old WWI mandate hates us. As for not destablizing Mexico, maybe not to annex it, but destablizing. Google "atf gunwalking scandal."
If it's like most Russian firearms, there are almost inevitably clones being produced in China. Look at the SKS and AK. (I am saying this as someone who is ignorant of the GM-94 so I could easily be wrong here).
If you think that "a few legal, widely owned semi-automatic rifles" are the only guns owned out there, you're in for a pretty rude awakening. There are a LOT of guns out there that are owned less-than-legally by both criminals and aficionados alike. Just take a look at any large drug bust in the US where weapons are seized, you'll be amazed to see what sort of fun firearms people who flout the law can collect.
I'm really interested in this - could you dummy down the second statement? I get that electrons are flowing through a semiconducter towards the transistor, but I'm not sure I follow the "occupy a large area shared between many atoms (non localized)"? Are you referring to electrons flowing from atom to atom via their bonds? Not trying to be pedantic, I just really want to understand what you're saying (and I'm nowhere near an EE, lol).
Slashdot Mirror
It's actually quite useful if you have something which monitors those files. No open CM ticket for a server, but you suddenly see someone logged in and making changes? Sound an alarm. .history shows you everything a user types as soon as they type it (even modifying the shell to keep 0 history would show up initially). We use splunk to monitor it, and also monitor /etc for any changes to system files. It's lightweight and has helped us find a number of issues before.
This is true, however some databases simply aren't compatible with local firewalls. Oracle for instance requires your server to be more or less wide open (request comes in on one port, a response is sent back indicating the port to actually communicate on, then the client resends the query to that new port - so, more or less all ports have to be unblocked). This is where stuff like centralized authentication, nagios, monitoring of the /home/*/.history files, etc comes in useful. Sometimes local firewalls simply aren't an option.
From the sounds of it, you're discussing disabling a software firewall, not an actual hardware firewall. There's a lot of applications which require local firewalls to be disabled - for instance, we disable local firewalls when we're deploying telephony application servers because of vendor requirements. Likewise, some applications require SELinux to be disabled as well. All of our servers are still collectively behind a firewall, and beyond that we have a number of ACLs and centralized authentication controlling them. As for not running a firewall being lazy - firewalls are tools. Sometimes they're the right one, and sometimes they aren't. The only way to tell is experience on when to use each tool (and budget too). The more time you spend with networking, the more you'll come to realize that. But since you're learning, stick to what you've been told until you master it. As Picasso said, "learn the rules like a pro, so you can break them like an artist."
You are dumb if you think that a single word has enough power to indicate someone's cowardice. Cunt, cunt, cuntity cuntcunt.
I have not RTFA, however, one thing that should be noted is Iron Dome is also built specifically to not intercept a large number of incoming projectiles. It monitors incoming trajectories and calculates approximately where they will land. If it is somewhere such as a field, it is ignored. If it will land in an urban center, it intercepts.
Hey, do you happen to have any info on that Russian NOTAM? I can't seem to find it anywhere, and I have no idea what the russian equivalent of "NOTAM" is... googling NOTAM just brings up the FAA warnings.
FYI, Iranians are not the biggest sponsors of "Islamic terrorists." That would be Saudi Arabia (and per some friends who are in military intel, UAE is up there too). Remember, sectarian divisions are very real in the extremist community. Iranians are predominantly Shia, whereas Jihadi terrorists are predominantly Sunni. That's not to say that there's not some mixing - which there most certainly is - but by no means are they a majority. The reality is actually the opposite of what you'd expect, considering Shi'ites have a big focus on martyrdom because of the the death of Hussein Ali. Otherwise, I agree with the rest of what you have to say. Ciao!
That's wonderful for future reference. However it doesn't help me when posting before it becomes common knowledge. I was more interested in trying to figure out where exactly the plane would have been attacked.
In that case, it sounds like they got a new weapons system and had no damn idea how to ID what they were shooting at, and brought down a plane they didn't intend to.
Ooof, I didn't see that article. Here's the great circle route, and it looks like it went right along the north/eastern borders of Ukraine. http://www.greatcirclemapper.n...
I'm not sure. It was at 32000 feet when they last had contact, which means it wasn't quite at cruising altitude, but it was still several miles up. The 777's cruising speed is mach .84, about 630 MPH. I'm not going to do the math (i'd love it if one of you aerospace guys would, especially since we know where it landed and the last known altitude and the great circle between Schipol and Kuala Lumpur), but I think it would be safe to say that on the ascent it would be going about 350-450 MPH. I can't see terrorists getting their hands on that kind of hardware. Both Ukraine and Russia on the other hand...
Some drugs do lead to brain damage. For instance, there was a study (later retracted) which showed 3,4 MDMA caused brain damage in recreational doses in rhesus monkeys. The study was retracted because the chemical provider had goofed, and provided pure reagent grade methamphetamine instead of MDMA. So, while MDMA was clinically safe, it put a BIG warning sign on meth, and for good reason.
Given that the job of headphones is to reproduce the soundwaves indicated by an audio source, I'm pretty sure that is the only metric that matters. Or, tell me, why should we pay hundreds of dollars for equipment that can't reproduce sound properly?
You do realize that classical music is used for rating headphones, yes? It's not because I listen to it exclusively, it's because it provides opportunities to see if there is enough clarity and definition of sound to do things like determine if you can tell violins from violas from cellos, or tell the horns apart. Read professional headphone reviews. It's not a matter of "superiority," it's stated because it's a tool in determining quality. Given you didn't know that, I'm pretty sure most of your other points are moot about determining fidelity. I'd rebut your statement about frequency response, but I think this image does a much better job. You sound like you're A) butthurt because someone is saying a brand you don't like is technically inferior, and B) like you simply have no idea what you're talking about.
Wow, way to have a completely tangential conversation. Sorry if I pissed in your punch, but your generalizations about music tastes of the populace, and desires of the market while completely ignoring actual facts about the hardware make me pretty sure you need to reread what slashdot is - news for nerds. Some of us are audiophiles. Some of us are musicians. Some of us are sound techs. A lot of us DO care about those numbers on the back of the box, and what they translate to when you experience the music. I'd rather pay for balanced headphones which can listen to anything and sound incredible for a fraction of the price than pad some business man's pockets for selling a subpar product. But hey, keep justifying spending too much for an inferior product to yourself. No one is saying "I am superior because I buy a different brand than you," I'm saying that this product is inferior for a number of technical reasons. Please join the conversation that is actually going on, not the one you want to have. Thank you.
They're really not that great. They're built for a single type of music (things that go thump). Try listening to something like an Opera or a Symphony and they'll quickly fall to shambles. They're unbalanced, there's no definition of sound, the soundstage is only decent on the low end, the frequency response is worse than you can find on most earbuds... they're pretty bad. And they're overpriced.
I wanted to try Kiva, but I had no interest in seeing a lot of risk and no benefit. They didn't provide any interest to you for lending your money, but you assumed risk if the person you loaned to didn't pay them back. Has that changed?
Seriously, that's what I'd like to know. Kiva allowed you to donate, but you couldn't make a profit off the loans you provided. So, what about this? Can I back a loan and earn interest off of it? I love the idea of this if it could be turned into an 'everyone wins' situation - i make money, the business person starts a business and makes money, the broker in the middle makes money.
I've seen two bums off their heads on butane and nail varnish gibbering away. They seemed to understand each other perfectly well.
I'm not a bum.
The jury's still out on that. But it is clear you're an asshole.
This is slashdot, news for nerds. The proper anatomical term is "anus."
I feel the same way! I have the ability to disable ads but I never bother. If people are looking to monetize their website and they offer a decent enough product for me to go there over and over I don't mind them making some money for their efforts.
You really need to learn US history a bit better. About US training and sending people to kill protesters, google "Kent State massacre." About the US invading and rigging an election, google "Operation AJAX" and learn a heck of a lot about why almost every country in the old WWI mandate hates us. As for not destablizing Mexico, maybe not to annex it, but destablizing. Google "atf gunwalking scandal."
If it's like most Russian firearms, there are almost inevitably clones being produced in China. Look at the SKS and AK. (I am saying this as someone who is ignorant of the GM-94 so I could easily be wrong here).
If you think that "a few legal, widely owned semi-automatic rifles" are the only guns owned out there, you're in for a pretty rude awakening. There are a LOT of guns out there that are owned less-than-legally by both criminals and aficionados alike. Just take a look at any large drug bust in the US where weapons are seized, you'll be amazed to see what sort of fun firearms people who flout the law can collect.
I'm really interested in this - could you dummy down the second statement? I get that electrons are flowing through a semiconducter towards the transistor, but I'm not sure I follow the "occupy a large area shared between many atoms (non localized)"? Are you referring to electrons flowing from atom to atom via their bonds? Not trying to be pedantic, I just really want to understand what you're saying (and I'm nowhere near an EE, lol).
Exactly what I was going to say. Just because it's 1 atom thick doesn't mean it's 2 dimensional.