They should of sorted this out before it happened!
Hasn't anybody over there heard of:
Test on Development System (while you are at it, bring some of the worker bees over to try it.
Sort out the problems (there will *always* be some).
Rinse and Repeat as necessary.
Final QA on Development System.
Back up Production System.
Install on Production System.
On my Toshiba laptop[1], and another one[2], the PCMCIA interface reports as having no interrupt assigned. This is not a Linux issue, it is a hardware/manufacturing/design issue.
Kernel versions greater than 2.4 have a problem, but this is not a kernel problem. It is that the hardware is not performing to specifications.
[1] Satellite Pro model A105-S2719
[2] Satellite Pro model A105-S4014
I find it very hard to believe that Vista wouldn't work with any router. A router just routes packets, it doesn't care where they come from. Maybe you meant your wireless network adapter. Which one was it?
Search for ["windows" and "DHCP"' or ["windows vista" and "DHCP"]. You will find the answer.
Most worthwhile optimisation is done by rethinking the design, and to a lesser degree hand-coding parts where you know the realities better than the compiler can guess, and just how to exploit that.
Laugh but try 100x3 long 2d array. First do it using standard i/j loop. Then handle the loop yourself [ie (when i == 100) i = 100). Check the timing (>30% on my tests).
Typically the administrator user is not exposed in XP Home or MCE.
Ctrl-Alt-Del gets you the text login. The "Administrator" user id typically has no password. The first user id assigned on an OEM install has full admin privileges. NUFF SAID?
Microsoft denies that the bug is a security vulnerability, since an attacker would have to have gained administrative access to a system before exploiting it.
Let's see here. When I bought my new laptop (with MCE on it), I logged in as myself (with admin rights). I tried to downgrade myself to a "Power User"
I was told by MCE that "there must be at least one administrator".
I logged out and logged in as "Administrator" and tried to downgrade my normal userid.
I was told once again by MCE that "there must be at least one administrator". This while I was logged in as Administrator and the user I was trying to change was the one set up on first boot of an OEM version (NOT "Administrator""
With this in mind, what is wrong with the assertion that "an attacker would have to have gained administrative access to a system before exploiting it"?
Election results do not need to be available immediately. Taking a day or a week for counting is perfectly fine.
Given the fact that the results of an election do not take effect for 60 to 90 days, there is no earthly reason that results need to be known at 7:01pm (when the polls close at 7:00pm)
In the telecomm world, though, customers expect a root cause for a "critical" defect in less than 24 hours (and there's a definition for critical, although I won't get into that here).
In the world of nuclear power plants, the systems that record all parts and events are even more critical (outage >24hours = cold shutdown of the plant). Fixes (and contract charges) are based on that fact.
Because fewer people gamble online and a certain segment of society looks down on it. Simply stated, gambling is easier to pick on.
In my state, the tax on tobacco was recently raised by 80 cents per pack (for health care for children). The sponsors, when asked about why they did not apply the same tax to alcohol replied that they did not think that the measure would pass if beer/wine/liquor was included. You are quite right in your statement.
After reading the articles linked from previous posts, it looks like the third outage was related to their cooling units not coming back online from the power outage linked to the Semi vs. Transformer battle. I know the units in our data center aren't hooked up to the UPS, but instead are wired directly to the generator in case of outage.
In many large datacenters, the standard hookup is powered through motor generators (external and ups are the supply). The MG's then supply the power to the equipment. The most common failure is that the phasing is not synced on transfer to/from utility power. This is generally very bad when transferring loads on 3 phase circuits, since in extreme circumstances it can cause a 3 phase motor to stall.
In one datacenter I contracted for, the transfer switch failed to sync on return to utility power. This caused a massive shutdown (both IBM and Honeywell mainframes in place). The eventual solution (once the switch was repaired) was to allow automatic transfer to backup but require manual transfer back to utility power (dirty utility power sucks). This was the only way to accomplish 7/9s availability for the datacenter (medical records for 8 hospitals).
For those unaware, www.whitehouse.com used to have naked woman on their site. But now unfortunately the Web appears to be more and more a place for politics instead of pornography:(
Firstly, most of the acquiring banks actually request that the merchants keep card number data for *at least* 6 months after the original transaction. This is to allow the cardholder time to make a chargeback, and for the acquiring bank to make enquiries with the merchant about the transaction. Some acquirers have much longer data retention periods.
So the full card number is required for
a) initial authorization request, typically taken when the cardholder places the order,
Yes
b) reauthorisation prior to dispatch (typically required when the order has taken more than a week or so to process - if the card is not re-authed the merchant may face chargeback. This varies between card issuers and acquirers.)
No
c) Settlement, ie when the merchant actually banks the money. For this the merchant sends an end of day settlement file containing card number and authorization details.
No
d) Then, as mentioned most acquirers request the details are kept for at least six months to allow for Request For Information queries about the transaction.
The acquirer (if you are referencing the agent who actually provides the authorization) may request but may not require the information to be kept, since all necessary information is provided by the data that I stated
Again, look at the standard before you post a critique.
The Payment Card Industry standards are, at this point, simply a recommendation. Having built systems which process credit cards, I found that the change to comply with PCI (and prevent ID/Card theft) is one line. In one system, the full card number is in the system (encrypted) only from the time it is entered to the time approval/disapproval is returned.
In fact, the card number is no longer needed to process a credit after the fact. The only information required is the merchant ID, the transaction ID and the approval code.
That said, the only way that merchants are dunned is in response to an audit (very rare) or a breach (unfortunately less rare).
The PCI standards allow for storing the card number as the last four (with X's filling the previous part), 4 X's and the last four or the last four alone.
If your merchant gives you a receipt (and their copy shows also) any thing other than XXXXXXXXXXXX1234 (shorten for some incarnations of Visa and AMEX), XXXX1234 or 1234 complain loudly to the manager of the establishment as well as your card issuer. Reference the Payment Card Industry/Data Security Standard 1.1 (2005).
If Blender really is that hard to use, I want to be discouraged from using it, because I don't want to waste months trying to learn it.
No one has said that it is hard to use. A lot of people have said it is different.
I don't mind an unintuitive interface.
Unintuitive is in the eye of the beholder. Any platform you use will have it's quirks. Any package you use will have it's quirks.
If I wanted a package that works like Autocad and not doing so will be a deal breaker I would buy Autocad.
If I wanted an OS that works like WindowsI would buy Windows.
And also: once I've learned it, am I more or less productive than with the alternatives?
YMMV. If any of the packages do not include some sort of a learning curve, they are either lacking in function or more geared to making you conform to the way the designer wants you to do your job. That is NOT an acceptable state, in my not so humble opinion.
I have spent months dealing with a "web designer" who uses Dreamscape. She has tried NVU and believes it is too hard. This same designer has all pages hard coded to use an 800x600 window. She also has no concept of what the HTML created by either package actually does. However, she has made a pretty good income using the tools that take all of the hard decisions out of the equation.
Bottom line, try each one (preferably without any preconceived notions) and decide which is best for you and your needs, not what is recommended by the "experts".
Geeks have rather strange behaviors, it's part of how our brain works. The male and female brains do NOT operate the same way. I'm not saying one is better than the other, just that they are different. A geeks brain works in an even "more different" way. Always figuring, calculating, imagining, obsessing.
Geeks are not normal human beings. We do not look at things the same way. We do not like the same sort of people. We tend to be antisocial. We tend to be *extremely* aggressive in what we believe. That said, most female geeks I have met tend to be more aggressive in what they believe. This is not bad nor good, but it is healthy.
My dad has asked me "where do you put this information" when I come up with a really obscure fact (or even the combination to a storage unit I go to once a year). This is not normal but it is commonplace for someone like me. This (on/.) should not be news. That we are surprised that someone would say "that suit looks almost transparent" as opposed to "The emperor has no clothes" speaks to why this article was written in the first place.
What the PHB thinks is often of less import than what the "line officer" thinks (when the rubber meets the road).
During the interval when our new and more corporate management was dropping a bunch of hints that they wanted us to dress "more professionally", but before the dress code was officially added to the employee handbook, I got some comments for being one of the few people continuing to wear jeans.
While I was working for an R&D group for one of the telcos, the Pres and CEO of the operating company came to our facility. I showed up in jeans, while everybody else wore suit and tie. When asked (by my coworkers), I told them that I was there to work, not to look good for 1 hour. This same company tolerated the fact that I wore a bolo tie and boots in our headquarters in PA (I live in AZ).
If your co-workers do not like the way you dress (or decide to comment on it), your choice is to:
a) Blow it off
-or-
b) Blow it off
And no, I don't really have a solution to the problem. But I could offer a few suggestions to improve this situation.
1) You have to be a dues paying member for three years before you get a vote. That stops countries from being induced to jump in for one vote.
2) You have to be in the top half (two thirds, whatever) of nations in the general industry you want to vote in standards for. That means Cyprus, etc., not being known for their software industry probably wouldn't have been allowed a vote on OOXML. Unfair? Yes, but life isn't fair and giving them a vote is more unfair to everyone else. Perhaps give all the small fry a subcommittee that gets a couple of votes if they are mostly in consensus on an issue.
3) Punish entites who openly game the system like Microsoft is doing. Say toss all MIcrosoft reps from ISO sponsored groups for five years and publicly rebuke national bodies who allowed their votes to be openly rigged.
I would change that to:
1) You have to be a dues paying member prior to the submission for consideration in order to vote on that submission. That stops countries from being induced to jump in simply to influence the voting on that one issue.
2) You have to participate in a majority of the discussions (say 75 percent) in order to vote (no last minute O->P upgrades of NBs which had not been involved in any of the discussions).
3) Representatives of the organization requesting the submission are disqualified from voting in any National Body (ECMA in this case).
4) Representatives of any company or organization involved in creating the specification of the proposed standard are disqualified from voting in any National Body (ECMA and Microsoft in this case).
5) Any National Body which is found to have irregularities in their process would be disqualified from participation in all votes for a period of time (say 1 year for the first offense, 5 years for the second). There are two many instances to list.
In the past, you would often lease your 'mainframe' software, and need to renew it every year. Often you would have to contact your sales rep, get a new key, and 'activate' the software for another year.
bzzzt...wrong
You needed to continue to pay to receive updates, not to continue using the software. There was no "authorization" key required. In fact, I used to provide hardware support to customers using DOS/360 on a 360/30 in 1987 (it did everything they needed).
The consent decree that IBM signed was to account for the fact that their business model (at the time) was to bundle hardware support in with the software support that customers needed (if the machine went down due to a failing card reader, you had to be up on your software subscription).
Most consumer grade ISP services are sold as 'up to X mbps'. There is no guarantee in availability. read the fine print it is all classified as 'best effort'.
The Army Reserve used to advertise:
You will serve one weekend per month and two weeks in the summer
Then, it became:
Most will serve one weekend per month and two weeks in the summer
Then, it became:
Many will serve one weekend per month and two weeks in the summer
Then, the statement disappeared entirely
Cable is making the same sort of statement with "*cough* Up to X mbps *cough*" - the fine print doesn't say "Most will only get sustained speeds of Y mbps where Y is significantly less than X
Slashdot Mirror
Test on Development System (while you are at it, bring some of the worker bees over to try it.
Sort out the problems (there will *always* be some).
Rinse and Repeat as necessary.
Final QA on Development System.
Back up Production System.
Install on Production System.
Kernel versions greater than 2.4 have a problem, but this is not a kernel problem. It is that the hardware is not performing to specifications. [1] Satellite Pro model A105-S2719 [2] Satellite Pro model A105-S4014
I was told by MCE that "there must be at least one administrator".
I logged out and logged in as "Administrator" and tried to downgrade my normal userid.
I was told once again by MCE that "there must be at least one administrator". This while I was logged in as Administrator and the user I was trying to change was the one set up on first boot of an OEM version (NOT "Administrator""
With this in mind, what is wrong with the assertion that "an attacker would have to have gained administrative access to a system before exploiting it"?
My mistake (should have previewed)
There is (to my knowledge) a requirement that each discrete firewall set be hosted on a different piece of equipment.
In one datacenter I contracted for, the transfer switch failed to sync on return to utility power. This caused a massive shutdown (both IBM and Honeywell mainframes in place). The eventual solution (once the switch was repaired) was to allow automatic transfer to backup but require manual transfer back to utility power (dirty utility power sucks). This was the only way to accomplish 7/9s availability for the datacenter (medical records for 8 hospitals).
The Payment Card Industry standards are, at this point, simply a recommendation. Having built systems which process credit cards, I found that the change to comply with PCI (and prevent ID/Card theft) is one line. In one system, the full card number is in the system (encrypted) only from the time it is entered to the time approval/disapproval is returned. In fact, the card number is no longer needed to process a credit after the fact. The only information required is the merchant ID, the transaction ID and the approval code. That said, the only way that merchants are dunned is in response to an audit (very rare) or a breach (unfortunately less rare). The PCI standards allow for storing the card number as the last four (with X's filling the previous part), 4 X's and the last four or the last four alone. If your merchant gives you a receipt (and their copy shows also) any thing other than XXXXXXXXXXXX1234 (shorten for some incarnations of Visa and AMEX), XXXX1234 or 1234 complain loudly to the manager of the establishment as well as your card issuer. Reference the Payment Card Industry/Data Security Standard 1.1 (2005).
Congress has to vote to stop a pay raise. If no vote is taken, the pay raise is AUTOMATIC
1) You have to be a dues paying member prior to the submission for consideration in order to vote on that submission. That stops countries from being induced to jump in simply to influence the voting on that one issue.
2) You have to participate in a majority of the discussions (say 75 percent) in order to vote (no last minute O->P upgrades of NBs which had not been involved in any of the discussions).
3) Representatives of the organization requesting the submission are disqualified from voting in any National Body (ECMA in this case).
4) Representatives of any company or organization involved in creating the specification of the proposed standard are disqualified from voting in any National Body (ECMA and Microsoft in this case).
5) Any National Body which is found to have irregularities in their process would be disqualified from participation in all votes for a period of time (say 1 year for the first offense, 5 years for the second). There are two many instances to list.
You needed to continue to pay to receive updates, not to continue using the software. There was no "authorization" key required. In fact, I used to provide hardware support to customers using DOS/360 on a 360/30 in 1987 (it did everything they needed).
The consent decree that IBM signed was to account for the fact that their business model (at the time) was to bundle hardware support in with the software support that customers needed (if the machine went down due to a failing card reader, you had to be up on your software subscription).
The Army Reserve used to advertise:
Then, it became:
Then, it became:
Then, the statement disappeared entirely
Cable is making the same sort of statement with "*cough* Up to X mbps *cough*" - the fine print doesn't say "Most will only get sustained speeds of Y mbps where Y is significantly less than X