I'm curious (and a bit hopeful) to see whether systemd can provide the necessary functionality without extensive custom scripting.
For systemd to properly handle all of the possible use cases and oddball installations that current init systems handle now, it will essentially become another shell with it's own interpreted language. And after all the screaming and yelling is done, we'll be right back where we started. Except with one more screw-ball language.
That's why *NIX environments are made up of a bunch of smaller components that do one thing each. And why systemd is garbage. Just try designing, writing and testing that one single object with such a large number of inputs, outputs and configuration options. And make sure that one setting doesn't break something else that logically should be unrelated. Pretty soon you've just got Windows.
Just a wrapper around mount. I don't have a problem with that. What does bother me is that Lennart and company have only figured out this late in the init game that mounting is something that we need done. Great. Go for it. You've still got a dozen or so other things that need to be handled (which scripts have been doing for ages). We will sit back in amusement and watch as you find yet another function that you've forgotten about. And rush to build yet another wheel or lever into your Rube Goldberg contraption.
What if it's the lead system administrator's password?
Why have you designed an enterprise wide administration process based on a hierarchy? Where an attack on (one of) the top nodes can gain entry into everything?
they should allow law-abiding citizens to do it themselves
I support the right of people to bear arms. That said; most of the violence in Chicago is gang vs gang. And from their point of view, they are protecting their neighborhood or favorite dealing street corner from their rivals. Things that they value as much as you value your family and home. It's a culture thing, and until you can change that and give these people something worthwhile (in our eyes) to defend, things will keep going on as they are.
An intelligence service won't tip their hand by revealing that they possess even the garbage. Because their counterpart would work backwards, figure out what good stuff they might have, which is now compromised, and plug those security holes.
Are an arm of the Russian government? A Russian contractor that works for the FSB on occasion? Or just a group that happens to be operating from within Russia.
I have a hard time believing that a government espionage agency would turn around and sell goods that it stole on the black market. Shadow Brokers may have intended to sell this stuff to the gov't, been turned down and now are seeking to unload this stuff for cash just to get some ROI. The fact that Snowden (a guest of the Russians) felt comfortable discussing this means that it's probably easily deniable as an officially sanctioned act. Or he'd be looking at being hauled either to a gulag or the nearest border to meet the CIA's private plane.
But Shadow Brokers isn't an agent of a nation with a lot to lose like the NSA is. MAD only works if both sides have a lot to lose. Neither will want to start a war. This is like a major power versus a crazy guy who just happens to have a nuke in his tool shed.
I'm not arguing for major powers alone possessing such tools. Unlike nukes, these can be built by poorly funded but highly educated groups. The NSA should have prioritized its mission to ensure that we (gov't and private entities alike) would have adequate defenses above deploying this stuff.
Slashdot Mirror
"Oh, the humanity!"
... rendering farm is behind schedule.
Cam whores.
Posting nude selfies for free instead of making all the basement dwellers go to the pay sites for pron.
No Facebook, LinkedIn or any cloud accounts either.
All of my devices data was copied to an encrypted thumb drive and mailed to a dead drop address ahead of me.
Am I free to go?
I'm curious (and a bit hopeful) to see whether systemd can provide the necessary functionality without extensive custom scripting.
For systemd to properly handle all of the possible use cases and oddball installations that current init systems handle now, it will essentially become another shell with it's own interpreted language. And after all the screaming and yelling is done, we'll be right back where we started. Except with one more screw-ball language.
They're about "this change is bad".
Not even so much this change is bad. But why does everything have to be fixed by cramming it into one component?
they can't design/write/test everything at once.
That's why *NIX environments are made up of a bunch of smaller components that do one thing each. And why systemd is garbage. Just try designing, writing and testing that one single object with such a large number of inputs, outputs and configuration options. And make sure that one setting doesn't break something else that logically should be unrelated. Pretty soon you've just got Windows.
Just a wrapper around mount. I don't have a problem with that. What does bother me is that Lennart and company have only figured out this late in the init game that mounting is something that we need done. Great. Go for it. You've still got a dozen or so other things that need to be handled (which scripts have been doing for ages). We will sit back in amusement and watch as you find yet another function that you've forgotten about. And rush to build yet another wheel or lever into your Rube Goldberg contraption.
What if it's the lead system administrator's password?
Why have you designed an enterprise wide administration process based on a hierarchy? Where an attack on (one of) the top nodes can gain entry into everything?
they should allow law-abiding citizens to do it themselves
I support the right of people to bear arms. That said; most of the violence in Chicago is gang vs gang. And from their point of view, they are protecting their neighborhood or favorite dealing street corner from their rivals. Things that they value as much as you value your family and home. It's a culture thing, and until you can change that and give these people something worthwhile (in our eyes) to defend, things will keep going on as they are.
sometimes the innocent do get caught up in the gun fights
Teach marksmanship in high school.
.... and all I could see was the Goldman Sachs home page.
Our best guy is on vacation in Moscow.
Scientists are going to have to repeat experiments with Stoli, Glenfiddich and Hennessy.
Surely you read the article before posting ...
I'm beginning to detect a pattern here.
I have a low battery.
As long as it sounds like this, I'll be happy.
you're
It was voicemail. How can you tell which form they used?
Victor Borge, where are you when we needed you?
By now, that would probably mean going back into the tire business. I can't see anything else worth saving.
An intelligence service won't tip their hand by revealing that they possess even the garbage. Because their counterpart would work backwards, figure out what good stuff they might have, which is now compromised, and plug those security holes.
Why does carrier have so much control over a phone?
Because US consumers never demanded unlocked phones that can be obtained from third parties and configured to a network with portable SIMs.
Shadow Brokers ARE the Russians
Are an arm of the Russian government? A Russian contractor that works for the FSB on occasion? Or just a group that happens to be operating from within Russia.
I have a hard time believing that a government espionage agency would turn around and sell goods that it stole on the black market. Shadow Brokers may have intended to sell this stuff to the gov't, been turned down and now are seeking to unload this stuff for cash just to get some ROI. The fact that Snowden (a guest of the Russians) felt comfortable discussing this means that it's probably easily deniable as an officially sanctioned act. Or he'd be looking at being hauled either to a gulag or the nearest border to meet the CIA's private plane.
But Shadow Brokers isn't an agent of a nation with a lot to lose like the NSA is. MAD only works if both sides have a lot to lose. Neither will want to start a war. This is like a major power versus a crazy guy who just happens to have a nuke in his tool shed.
I'm not arguing for major powers alone possessing such tools. Unlike nukes, these can be built by poorly funded but highly educated groups. The NSA should have prioritized its mission to ensure that we (gov't and private entities alike) would have adequate defenses above deploying this stuff.