You don't seem to understand a few basics about storage, so let me explain them briefly:
Backup is a method of storing your data in a safe place, so if you accidentally or purposefully delete it, or if you have a (severe) hardware failure, you still have your data. This automatically means you'll want to store your backup data on a totally, physically separated medium. If someone wants to destroy your data, a distributed filesystem won't do you any good. Taking one way snapshots over a network link to a remote location, for instance using rsync and a remote filesystem that supports snapshots, can be a viable solution for short term backups, but if you want longer term retention, "old hat" backup equipment still is a viable solution. How are you planning to restore from data corruption that happened 2 weeks ago? How do you protect against single sector failure? I have yet to see consumer grade raid controllers that actually do a read-verify on every read, so you're depending on raid-scrubbing to detect failures, with the setups you're looking at. A backup is for recovery of data lost on your primary storage system. You can make your primary storage system resilient with distributing and snapshotting it to an inch of it's life, but it's not a backup. If you don't make backups, your data obviously isn't worth it, so why bother making your primary storage resilient in the first place?
A "Super blahblahbla" or whatever hardware you are planning to buy now, will not give you "a decade's worth of time". Look at 10, 20 and 30 years ago. Would you honestly say you'd want to store all your data on a state of the art 7*40GB RAID5 system, as was the bees' knees in 2001? Or how about a pristine 40MB IDE hard drive, the best you could buy in 1991? I think 1981 was still cassette or single sided floppy disc territory.... Seriously, never look forward more than 3 years with setups like this.
Because you get the same amount of single sector failures, no matter what the capacity of your discs is. As soon as they can slam more data on the same surface, they will do so, because the commercial threshold for data loss seems to be the chance of single sector failure.
Also, if i had only 10 SATA discs for virtual machines image storage, I'd be really unhappy, let alone three. in the summary it clearly states hosting VMs for HA is a requirement. Judging by the number of disks without looking at the requirements is bad, m'kay?
Because you need the VMs with HA, I'd really be looking at enterprise level storage with decent backups. Distributed filesystems will, as far as i know, not grant you transparent failover for your hypervisor. You'll still need some server to centralize your storage requests on a block device level, making the distribution layer invisible to your hypervisors.
It's not about the circuit, it's about the sensor itself. They use a printer head to print particles that form nanotubes on the paper.That is actually something to be proud of, if you can achieve that.
There is no such thing as a "one-time issue" with RHEL. You have to pay for a yearly minimum support contract, for the right to use software that has their trade marked brand name and logo's embedded. Once that runs out, you should either renew, or remove the offending binaries, documentation and logos off your systems. You do get update binaries in this minimal contract, which is what you really want anyway. Waiting for CentOS to come up with those may be the difference in having your systems compromised or not. There's nothing wrong with CentOS, but it's always behind RHEL, because of the mere concept of it.
OP: make sure you make the CIO sign for the fact that he's running software that's not supported on enterprise level, or certified to run on the hardware infrastructure, or approved as a supported platform by any of the applications running on the OS. Any and all extra expenses and damages resulting from that, are a risk he has to willingly take, and just to cover your own behind, I would recommend you have him sign for that.
What if people don't start paying substantial amounts of that $687/month of yours for the first 5 years after they finish college? It's not unheard of that people that are fresh out of college don't make the same as people that have 5 or more years of working experience. Not only that, but they'll have a lot of tax deductibles once they start having kids, so in reality, the chances you'll be getting a solid $687 a month for the entire period are rather low
Maybe most of the people will be able to pay off the loans, but the people that won't be, may just make the profitability of the whole scheme go out of the window. If, compared to other investments, if there's not enough money to be made, you'll have a hard time finding investors that will want to sink their money in this sort of thing. Those institutions won't be looking at individuals not paying off their loan, but at the total return on their investment.
You can't really foreclose on a college education, so what are you going to do when the industry your education is about is in shambles? What if you get health problems, or marry someone that also has a student loan? Will one of you be able to (temporarily) stop working to take care of the kids?
If so, all they need to accept now is the fact that random gene mutations happen, and they'll accept evolution as actually happening. The starting point and the origin may be still debatable, but I dare say that it's hard for creationists to deny actual evolution happening on this planet as we speak, and in the past.
It's not just designer hand bags that are being copied. If that was all, there wouldn't be any large scale economic problem. It's basically *everything* that's worth more with a brand tag on it. Even if it's a bad and cheap copy of a phone battery, tagging it "Nokia" will make it double in value for less than the cost of the tagging. Simple parts like high grade steel bolts for planes, cars etc. get copied a lot as well. Make something sub par, tag it to be high quality and make more profit on it.
It's not just the west buying this stuff. China itself is a big market for these goods as well. They are starting to feel the pain in their own economy of corruption and fraud. Babies are dying because baby milk powder gets poisoned with melamine. Train safety systems fail due to inferior parts being used, causing train crashes. Chinese companies lose contracts all over the world due to bad quality products delivered, even if their own fabrication was good. If they used inferior parts that fail safety tests, they will start testing them internally and go after the companies selling them fake products. This is the stage the Chinese economy is in now. They have discovered that this large scale of fakes and frauds is hurting themselves just as much as it's hurting other countries.
How come the studio's get to become judge if something could be possibly related to this newsbin2 site? What if they decide that slashdot.org is in fact a front for newsbin2? Does BT have to close access to slashdot.org then?
I see plenty of reasons for BT to not obey this court order and wait for the trial that follows when they disobey.
The shadows may look "better" but the shade and reflected light on the placed subject still needs work. The palette of the placed object also seems to lack white balancing to the picture.
As long as someone tells you there's fake in the picture, you can still tell what the fake bit is, without using a computer to spot anomalies. It's cool to see that tools get this powerful, but it's not good enough to fake any sharp observer yet, let alone a decent forensic study with computer aid.
Depending on only encryption in this case proves to be weak. Using more layers, like IP firewalls and authorization will help mitigate this. The attacker needs to inject XML into the server to get error responses. If that's not possible due to a firewall, or replies will not be generated due to lack of authorization, it will be a lot harder to get data required to crack the encryption.
It just shows how much of the last bar you still have. Once you go from one bar to zero, you essentially only know you have "less than one bar" left, but not how much. There is no change to how deep the batteries get discharged, you just know better what risk you are taking if you decide to drive on.
The TFA also tells about the software "hack" to the 120V charge cable to make it work with 240V as well. That's not so special, considering the same cable is used with different software in Europe, where 240V is the standard. Also improving it to be better, but not different.
People over the age of 90 often are very ill, much more than people that are around 30. The ill ones you don't see, because they are in special care and not out on the streets. People over 90 often have bad habits, just about as often as people that are around 30. Statistics say that if you make it to 90, you have less than 50% of making 100, while If you are around 30, you have over 95% making it to 40. Your assumptions are flawed and not based on any numbers or facts.
True, not everyone that smokes dies of cancer or vascular disease, but that doesn't mean that nobody at 90 has ever smoked, or doesn't still smoke. Wat is a fact, is that people that fall seriously ill (due to bad habits, bad luck or genetically triggered), usually don't live very long if it happens after they are around 70 years old. The human body is slower to recover from illness when we get older, so serious conditions take much more victims amongst the elderly. An elderly person that gets a vascular disease at old age, usually dies from that.
The people with a genetic disposition for vascular diseases, usually get symptoms well before they make it to 90 years old. The same applies for several other "big killers" like Alzheimers, cancer, osteoporosis, the effects of virusus (HPV causes cancer in a significant part of the population, HIV kills all but a few, that seem to be resistant) and probably a few more. The genome of someone that made it to 115 is important just for that. How do we find out what combination of genes "protects" us from the "big killers"?
Your signature: I want to own a monkey. Or a Congressman. Not much difference.
Monkeys can in general be trusted more. They may not do what you want them to, but at least their intentions are clear. The price to own a monkey is never more than the monkey can eat him/herself. Monkeys don't require suits, personal assistants or travel expenses. Monkeys are public about the amount of grooming they do and who their friends are. Maybe it would be a wise idea to replace congress with a population of monkeys?
This was a women in the Netherlands. Only one female ever made it to the age of 115 ever in the Netherlands. Even though the results are officially anonymous, there is only one person that could have been the donor. By stating the age she died, they effectively gave away her identity.
Dutch public transport implemented a known weak and already hacked Mifare card. They announced just a few weeks ago they will be upgrading to a card system that has a unique key for every card issued. Even if you can hack a single card in 7 hours, fraud will be detected as soon as clones show up or the credit on the card is registered to be inconsistent with what's in the central database. The card will be invalidated and due to the Orwellian Dutch society, there will be camera pictures of the person trying to use it to get onto a platform once it's blocked.
I'm sure someone will find a way around this "limitation" sooner or later, but it appears it's commercially viable to buy cards with unique keys. All that is left now is for someone to find out a method to crack these cards in seconds, or to find out that someone was lazy and used an algorithm rather than randomness to create the keys. Once the amount of fraud and the ease to commit it increases above a threshold, going after the individuals doing it is no longer feasible.
Pushing him will burn him out. Not challenging him will make him never learn how to really work for something. He has to learn life's lessons as well as as much as he can possibly learn of all the stuff taught in schools, university and all those places. I was never challenged in school and turned out too damn lazy for my own good. It took me twenty years to learn stuff I should have learned growing up, before I started to succeed in dealing with every days challenges. Just don't push him against his will, make him want it himself. Make sure he has enough social interaction with people his age, but also people that can challenge him on his own mental level.
In the past, when printed books were invented, it was deemed fair to give the original artist some money for each copy sold. That is, the original artist, not his agent, the publishing company or someone he sold his "rights" to. I don't object to that. I do object to the movie and music companies getting 90% of the money made from the work of art. Evidently, artists should be happy to get about 10% of the price consumers pay for something. The other 90% is purely for distribution, and as we all know, since we have broadband Internet and writable optical media, there should be an insignificant charge for that, not nine times the money the artists get. If this invalidates the business case for the majority of publishing companies, tough luck.
The industry was thriving on a single market anomaly. The anomaly is being corrected and the industry will cease to have a right to exist. You can't keep coaches the only form of transport and keep automobiles, subways, taxis, trains and all that out, just because the coach drivers have friends they bought a seat in congress for.
By specifically using high functioning autistic people, you are already making the exemption that invalidates the whole concept. High functioning means that they can more or less function in a normal environment, doing normal work and living a normal work. Over 10% of the IT workforce I've been in the last 10 years, has been high functioning autistic people, including administrators, DBAs, penetration testers, indeed software testers, and even a team leader. Come back when you can use every "rain man" offered to you in your company and I'll start thinking you have done something out of the ordinary.
Come on, you are way off topic here. You deserve the troll remark. It's about obscurity as a risk mitigation factor, not as an unbreakable defense. That has nothing to do with what OS is better at staying secure. All "major" operating systems get code reviews. Once they get more popular, they get more people reviewing code and probing for vulnerabilities. I'm fairly certain Windows and OSX get more code reviews and probing than FreeBSD does. If you want to spend time finding a vulnerability in an OS for profit, you spend time on the one with the biggest potential gains. Getting a zeroday on FreeBSD most likely will not gain you a lot, while getting one on Windows will give you your own botnet of meeeeelions of machines, controlling meeeelions of credit cards, bank accounts and what not.
Not the quality of the code, but the obscurity of FreeBSD is what caused the lack of remote vulnerabilities.
There was, but that was in the times that the air was clean and sex was dirty. A large capacity drive was 20MB and comprised of 4 platters in a 5.25" enclosure, double the size of a CD-ROM drive.
The original question stated no connecting the drives up to a computer was possible, since the owner didn't own anything that still had the required connectors/controllers to do so. Zeroing out isn't an option within the constraints given.
They turn it on, the drives get launched by the magnetic field and hit someone in the head, causing permanent brain damage. They then use the drive serial numbers to track them to you and sue you in the gutter.
Magnetic drill bits don't drill any better than non-magnetic drill bits. What's your point? You still need to drill the platters into small bits before you can be relatively certain no useful information can be retrieved.
Show me a T4 that scales to 32 or 64 sockets for a single container. For that matter, show me any T-series that can. Now show me a non T-series sparc CPU that scales to 64 CPUs that will outperform an 8 socket 10 core X86-64 latest gen Intel Xeon box for the same price. If you can do that, I'd be all ears.
Slashdot Mirror
You don't seem to understand a few basics about storage, so let me explain them briefly:
Backup is a method of storing your data in a safe place, so if you accidentally or purposefully delete it, or if you have a (severe) hardware failure, you still have your data. This automatically means you'll want to store your backup data on a totally, physically separated medium. If someone wants to destroy your data, a distributed filesystem won't do you any good. Taking one way snapshots over a network link to a remote location, for instance using rsync and a remote filesystem that supports snapshots, can be a viable solution for short term backups, but if you want longer term retention, "old hat" backup equipment still is a viable solution. How are you planning to restore from data corruption that happened 2 weeks ago? How do you protect against single sector failure? I have yet to see consumer grade raid controllers that actually do a read-verify on every read, so you're depending on raid-scrubbing to detect failures, with the setups you're looking at. A backup is for recovery of data lost on your primary storage system. You can make your primary storage system resilient with distributing and snapshotting it to an inch of it's life, but it's not a backup. If you don't make backups, your data obviously isn't worth it, so why bother making your primary storage resilient in the first place?
A "Super blahblahbla" or whatever hardware you are planning to buy now, will not give you "a decade's worth of time". Look at 10, 20 and 30 years ago. Would you honestly say you'd want to store all your data on a state of the art 7*40GB RAID5 system, as was the bees' knees in 2001? Or how about a pristine 40MB IDE hard drive, the best you could buy in 1991? I think 1981 was still cassette or single sided floppy disc territory.... Seriously, never look forward more than 3 years with setups like this.
Because you get the same amount of single sector failures, no matter what the capacity of your discs is. As soon as they can slam more data on the same surface, they will do so, because the commercial threshold for data loss seems to be the chance of single sector failure.
Also, if i had only 10 SATA discs for virtual machines image storage, I'd be really unhappy, let alone three. in the summary it clearly states hosting VMs for HA is a requirement. Judging by the number of disks without looking at the requirements is bad, m'kay?
Because you need the VMs with HA, I'd really be looking at enterprise level storage with decent backups. Distributed filesystems will, as far as i know, not grant you transparent failover for your hypervisor. You'll still need some server to centralize your storage requests on a block device level, making the distribution layer invisible to your hypervisors.
It's not about the circuit, it's about the sensor itself. They use a printer head to print particles that form nanotubes on the paper.That is actually something to be proud of, if you can achieve that.
There is no such thing as a "one-time issue" with RHEL. You have to pay for a yearly minimum support contract, for the right to use software that has their trade marked brand name and logo's embedded. Once that runs out, you should either renew, or remove the offending binaries, documentation and logos off your systems. You do get update binaries in this minimal contract, which is what you really want anyway. Waiting for CentOS to come up with those may be the difference in having your systems compromised or not. There's nothing wrong with CentOS, but it's always behind RHEL, because of the mere concept of it.
OP: make sure you make the CIO sign for the fact that he's running software that's not supported on enterprise level, or certified to run on the hardware infrastructure, or approved as a supported platform by any of the applications running on the OS. Any and all extra expenses and damages resulting from that, are a risk he has to willingly take, and just to cover your own behind, I would recommend you have him sign for that.
What if people don't start paying substantial amounts of that $687/month of yours for the first 5 years after they finish college? It's not unheard of that people that are fresh out of college don't make the same as people that have 5 or more years of working experience. Not only that, but they'll have a lot of tax deductibles once they start having kids, so in reality, the chances you'll be getting a solid $687 a month for the entire period are rather low
Maybe most of the people will be able to pay off the loans, but the people that won't be, may just make the profitability of the whole scheme go out of the window. If, compared to other investments, if there's not enough money to be made, you'll have a hard time finding investors that will want to sink their money in this sort of thing. Those institutions won't be looking at individuals not paying off their loan, but at the total return on their investment.
You can't really foreclose on a college education, so what are you going to do when the industry your education is about is in shambles? What if you get health problems, or marry someone that also has a student loan? Will one of you be able to (temporarily) stop working to take care of the kids?
If so, all they need to accept now is the fact that random gene mutations happen, and they'll accept evolution as actually happening. The starting point and the origin may be still debatable, but I dare say that it's hard for creationists to deny actual evolution happening on this planet as we speak, and in the past.
They're in my fridge right now!
It's not just designer hand bags that are being copied. If that was all, there wouldn't be any large scale economic problem. It's basically *everything* that's worth more with a brand tag on it. Even if it's a bad and cheap copy of a phone battery, tagging it "Nokia" will make it double in value for less than the cost of the tagging. Simple parts like high grade steel bolts for planes, cars etc. get copied a lot as well. Make something sub par, tag it to be high quality and make more profit on it.
It's not just the west buying this stuff. China itself is a big market for these goods as well. They are starting to feel the pain in their own economy of corruption and fraud. Babies are dying because baby milk powder gets poisoned with melamine. Train safety systems fail due to inferior parts being used, causing train crashes. Chinese companies lose contracts all over the world due to bad quality products delivered, even if their own fabrication was good. If they used inferior parts that fail safety tests, they will start testing them internally and go after the companies selling them fake products. This is the stage the Chinese economy is in now. They have discovered that this large scale of fakes and frauds is hurting themselves just as much as it's hurting other countries.
How come the studio's get to become judge if something could be possibly related to this newsbin2 site? What if they decide that slashdot.org is in fact a front for newsbin2? Does BT have to close access to slashdot.org then? I see plenty of reasons for BT to not obey this court order and wait for the trial that follows when they disobey.
The shadows may look "better" but the shade and reflected light on the placed subject still needs work. The palette of the placed object also seems to lack white balancing to the picture.
As long as someone tells you there's fake in the picture, you can still tell what the fake bit is, without using a computer to spot anomalies. It's cool to see that tools get this powerful, but it's not good enough to fake any sharp observer yet, let alone a decent forensic study with computer aid.
Depending on only encryption in this case proves to be weak. Using more layers, like IP firewalls and authorization will help mitigate this. The attacker needs to inject XML into the server to get error responses. If that's not possible due to a firewall, or replies will not be generated due to lack of authorization, it will be a lot harder to get data required to crack the encryption.
It just shows how much of the last bar you still have. Once you go from one bar to zero, you essentially only know you have "less than one bar" left, but not how much. There is no change to how deep the batteries get discharged, you just know better what risk you are taking if you decide to drive on. The TFA also tells about the software "hack" to the 120V charge cable to make it work with 240V as well. That's not so special, considering the same cable is used with different software in Europe, where 240V is the standard. Also improving it to be better, but not different.
People over the age of 90 often are very ill, much more than people that are around 30. The ill ones you don't see, because they are in special care and not out on the streets. People over 90 often have bad habits, just about as often as people that are around 30. Statistics say that if you make it to 90, you have less than 50% of making 100, while If you are around 30, you have over 95% making it to 40. Your assumptions are flawed and not based on any numbers or facts.
True, not everyone that smokes dies of cancer or vascular disease, but that doesn't mean that nobody at 90 has ever smoked, or doesn't still smoke. Wat is a fact, is that people that fall seriously ill (due to bad habits, bad luck or genetically triggered), usually don't live very long if it happens after they are around 70 years old. The human body is slower to recover from illness when we get older, so serious conditions take much more victims amongst the elderly. An elderly person that gets a vascular disease at old age, usually dies from that.
The people with a genetic disposition for vascular diseases, usually get symptoms well before they make it to 90 years old. The same applies for several other "big killers" like Alzheimers, cancer, osteoporosis, the effects of virusus (HPV causes cancer in a significant part of the population, HIV kills all but a few, that seem to be resistant) and probably a few more. The genome of someone that made it to 115 is important just for that. How do we find out what combination of genes "protects" us from the "big killers"?
Your signature: I want to own a monkey. Or a Congressman. Not much difference. Monkeys can in general be trusted more. They may not do what you want them to, but at least their intentions are clear. The price to own a monkey is never more than the monkey can eat him/herself. Monkeys don't require suits, personal assistants or travel expenses. Monkeys are public about the amount of grooming they do and who their friends are. Maybe it would be a wise idea to replace congress with a population of monkeys?
This was a women in the Netherlands. Only one female ever made it to the age of 115 ever in the Netherlands. Even though the results are officially anonymous, there is only one person that could have been the donor. By stating the age she died, they effectively gave away her identity.
How an embryo was formed is no longer significant, if inbreeds have 100% the same genes. Thats his point.
Dutch public transport implemented a known weak and already hacked Mifare card. They announced just a few weeks ago they will be upgrading to a card system that has a unique key for every card issued. Even if you can hack a single card in 7 hours, fraud will be detected as soon as clones show up or the credit on the card is registered to be inconsistent with what's in the central database. The card will be invalidated and due to the Orwellian Dutch society, there will be camera pictures of the person trying to use it to get onto a platform once it's blocked.
I'm sure someone will find a way around this "limitation" sooner or later, but it appears it's commercially viable to buy cards with unique keys. All that is left now is for someone to find out a method to crack these cards in seconds, or to find out that someone was lazy and used an algorithm rather than randomness to create the keys. Once the amount of fraud and the ease to commit it increases above a threshold, going after the individuals doing it is no longer feasible.
Pushing him will burn him out. Not challenging him will make him never learn how to really work for something. He has to learn life's lessons as well as as much as he can possibly learn of all the stuff taught in schools, university and all those places. I was never challenged in school and turned out too damn lazy for my own good. It took me twenty years to learn stuff I should have learned growing up, before I started to succeed in dealing with every days challenges. Just don't push him against his will, make him want it himself. Make sure he has enough social interaction with people his age, but also people that can challenge him on his own mental level.
In the past, when printed books were invented, it was deemed fair to give the original artist some money for each copy sold. That is, the original artist, not his agent, the publishing company or someone he sold his "rights" to. I don't object to that. I do object to the movie and music companies getting 90% of the money made from the work of art. Evidently, artists should be happy to get about 10% of the price consumers pay for something. The other 90% is purely for distribution, and as we all know, since we have broadband Internet and writable optical media, there should be an insignificant charge for that, not nine times the money the artists get. If this invalidates the business case for the majority of publishing companies, tough luck.
The industry was thriving on a single market anomaly. The anomaly is being corrected and the industry will cease to have a right to exist. You can't keep coaches the only form of transport and keep automobiles, subways, taxis, trains and all that out, just because the coach drivers have friends they bought a seat in congress for.
By specifically using high functioning autistic people, you are already making the exemption that invalidates the whole concept. High functioning means that they can more or less function in a normal environment, doing normal work and living a normal work. Over 10% of the IT workforce I've been in the last 10 years, has been high functioning autistic people, including administrators, DBAs, penetration testers, indeed software testers, and even a team leader. Come back when you can use every "rain man" offered to you in your company and I'll start thinking you have done something out of the ordinary.
When will the grey memorial edition devices be available in the store? Will they have extra RAM?
Come on, you are way off topic here. You deserve the troll remark. It's about obscurity as a risk mitigation factor, not as an unbreakable defense. That has nothing to do with what OS is better at staying secure. All "major" operating systems get code reviews. Once they get more popular, they get more people reviewing code and probing for vulnerabilities. I'm fairly certain Windows and OSX get more code reviews and probing than FreeBSD does. If you want to spend time finding a vulnerability in an OS for profit, you spend time on the one with the biggest potential gains. Getting a zeroday on FreeBSD most likely will not gain you a lot, while getting one on Windows will give you your own botnet of meeeeelions of machines, controlling meeeelions of credit cards, bank accounts and what not.
Not the quality of the code, but the obscurity of FreeBSD is what caused the lack of remote vulnerabilities.
There was, but that was in the times that the air was clean and sex was dirty. A large capacity drive was 20MB and comprised of 4 platters in a 5.25" enclosure, double the size of a CD-ROM drive.
The original question stated no connecting the drives up to a computer was possible, since the owner didn't own anything that still had the required connectors/controllers to do so. Zeroing out isn't an option within the constraints given.
They turn it on, the drives get launched by the magnetic field and hit someone in the head, causing permanent brain damage. They then use the drive serial numbers to track them to you and sue you in the gutter.
Magnetic drill bits don't drill any better than non-magnetic drill bits. What's your point? You still need to drill the platters into small bits before you can be relatively certain no useful information can be retrieved.
Show me a T4 that scales to 32 or 64 sockets for a single container. For that matter, show me any T-series that can. Now show me a non T-series sparc CPU that scales to 64 CPUs that will outperform an 8 socket 10 core X86-64 latest gen Intel Xeon box for the same price. If you can do that, I'd be all ears.