Couldn't one simply contact the local police department about the problem? Harrassment is illegal whether it's committed face to face, over the phone or over the 'net.
IANAL, but I believe that according to postal laws that if something was shipped to you mistakenly, it's yours to keep.
I would imagine that Amazon charging customers after the fact would be illegal.
Thanks a lot, now I've got the jingle from the commercial stuck in my head! I think my younger brother actually had one of these, the retractable claws in the tires were pretty cool.
Just be sure to watch out for the boot archive corruption problem. The new bootloader (legacy Grub) can potentially make your Solaris 10, release 2 system much less reliable than a release 1 system.
For some reason, Grub stores a memory image of the kernel in the root filesystem. This image is loaded during the bootstrap process so that the bootloader does not have to perform I/O on the root filesystem before the kernel's available. The image gets updated via a "bootadm update-archive" when the system goes down _gracefully_.
What can burn you is if you modify something on the root filesystem (we have yet to narrow this down) but don't bring the server down or update the boot archive. If the system goes down unexpectedly while in this state, _it_will_not_boot_! The system will complain about a corrupted boot archive and require you to go into single-user mode to fix the problem. This usually requires one to clear the system/boot (IIRC) service, update the boot-archive and reboot. There's no fix for this, the only workaround is to run a cron job to update the boot archive.
We discovered this issue when one of our server rooms lost power. We spent _days_ fixing the corrupted boot archives. As far as I know, this problem is not documented in any system manuals.
A very common comment that I hear from people regarding computer security is, "we're not a target". This of course assumes that crackers select their targets based on some criteria other than they can hit your system over the 'net. Sadly, it's been my experience that when such a person's system is compromised they just want it brought back up and the particular exploit that was used remedied.
"Email is harder, because it's fundamentally peer-to-peer (layered through a series of client-server interactions), which means the end users actually have to manage a digital identity."
I have to disagree with this statement since end users could use a notary to manage this identity. Specifically, I'm thinking of a website that allows users to send and read encrypted messages. One would create an account on the site which would then generate the necessary crptographic keys; the user could then send encrypted email by using the website. The website would also manage other peoples' keys for the user.
I haven't entirely thought this idea through, but I'm not aware of anyone having attempted such a thing.
Isn't that how auctions are supposed to work - you try to bid just enough, but not too much?
Not when you're bidding by proxy, which is what you're doing on eBay.
You tell your proxy how much you're willing to spend and the proxy then makes bids on your behalf up to your maximum amount. Apparently a lot of people don't understand this so they're engaging in self-defeating behavior. If you're going to keep contacting your proxy and increasing your maximum amount, then why are you using a proxy?
It is against the ebay rules. And if you're in a situation where it seems apparent that it might be happening, they have submission form in their documentation specifically for shilling complaints. And in fact, they do enforce the policy in my experience.
That's been my experience as well. Some time ago I was bidding on some menus from the famous Berghoff restaurant in Chicago since it was closing. I lost the auction, in which there was only one other bidder, and then received a second chance message from eBay. I'm assuming this was because the winning bidder retracted his bid. Unfortunately the second chance offer was at a higher price than I was willing to pay so I didn't respond, instead I bid on another auction for these menus. Well, that auction ended exactly the same way as the first one, but this time the seller contacted me directly to see if I was interested in buying the item directly. I didn't respond to him, but instead bid on a third auction for these items. The _third_ auction also ended the same way with some guy with only one or two previous auctions winning the item. I had been waiting for this since I began to suspect a shill bidder after the first auction and contacted eBay. I never did hear back from them, but all auctions from the seller in question were cancelled and his account was terminated.
The people that complain about sniping are the ones that don't understand how bidding by proxy works. Rather than entering their maximum bid like they should, these people put in an amount less than their max, then see if anyone raises them, then they raise their price, etc. If they're going to try to win auctions this way, then they deserve to be sniped.
Personally, I avoid eBay like a plague. it's got sucker written all over it.
You're a sucker for not buying from eBay. That's how I purchase nearly all of my electronics and I typically pay 30% to 60% less than the retail price. Sure, some of the gear is either second-hand or refurbished, but I'm saving a ton of money.
Bob Beck gave a talk on spamd at NYCBSDCon this past October. I've published some recordings of the conference proceedings, but only on DVD and CD media so they're not available on the Net. A guy named Nikolai from the NYC group also made recordings, which he's posted here: http://www.fetissov.org/public/nycbsdcon06/
Here's a direct link to the spamd presentation. Slides are also available.
I've taken a couple of airplane flights recently that have had XM receivers embedded into the arm rests, so I naturally checked out the service. I really did enjoy the number of channels that were available, but there's no way I'm going to pay for such a service with all of those ads. I've pretty much eliminated television from my life, so I've grown accustomed to not seeing or hearing those advertisements. There's no way I'd ever voluntarily reintroduce them into my life.
I used to work for Learning Curve International (and then RC2 after the buy-out); they manufactured childrens toys, diecast collectibles, infant care products, etc. We had a few small internal sales teams (international, domestic and custom/premium sales) along with international distributors (United Kingdom, Australia, Germany, Japan, etc.) and independent reps/rep groups. Yes, we farmed out certain parts of our sales force, but it's incorrect to say that we farmed out sales as a whole.
I would expect that many other manufacturers do the same. They farm out some sales positions, but not the entire department.
I'm no vet, but that's the first thing I thought of when seeing the acronym. Some time ago I caught a Discovery Channel show about the MOAB. The show also talked about a new device that was deployed from an aircraft like a bomb, then split apart and threw out hundreds of these spinning discs that communicated amongst themselves and then started firing at targets. They showed a brief demo of one of the devices taking out an entire tank column.
I _really_ wish the FCC would stop trying to control markets and technologies. I can understand the issues with interference, but exactly how is a monopoly in a new and developing industry a bad thing for consumers? Isn't the first company providing services in a certain space a monopoly? Does that mean we shouldn't allow a company to come up with a new radio technology unless there's another company that's also doing it?
Being a monopoly is not evil in and of itself, it's when that monopoly uses its power to keep others out of the market that it becomes a problem. How exactly could a merger of Sirius and XM Radio keep others out of the market? It's not like they can prevent competitors from launching satellites, or buying bandwidth on someone else's satellite. Consumers will always be free to purchase a new receiver if need be.
For some reason I was thinking the ALOMs on the SPARCs were simpler than the service processors on the x86 systems
That's how things have been setup, but occasionally the BIOS is misconfigured to do something stupid like remain off after an interruption of power.
Doing that via SVM.
We're running various releases of FreeBSD, OpenBSD, Red Hat Linux, Solaris, Windows 2003, etc. We're forced to run Solaris for certain systems due to applications being built for a particular release or due to driver support for specialty cards.
Thanks for the info on the Sun servers supporting SAS; we've only purchased X2100, X2200 and v20Z's. I believe we only have the model 1 X2100 and X2200's, but we fortunately did spring for the service processor.
I'm aware of a workaround for the boot archive issue, and yeah we do reboot when the patches require it:) I think what's happening is that we're doing some post-install work with cfengine and are not updating the boot archive. The systems aren't typically restarted when cfengine runs since that's how we're regularly deploying updates and the systems are used for soft-realtime applications (VOIP).
I feel pretty comfortable with Solaris on the x86 systems Sun ships. It's the other vendors who may not offer support for LOM that make me nervous; some of these systems have been deployed to fairly remote facilities.
My condolences. I've managed Solaris systems for years, almost entirely SPARCs, but the new place I'm working for buys the cheap x86 junk. Now the x86 systems that Sun ships aren't bad despite some issues with the nVidia RAID chip, Intel Gigabit ethernet nics and the damn x86 BIOS, but running it on a generic 1U x86 server is a joke compared to SPARC. You've got no lights out management support (fortunately some of Sun's AMD systems come with a dedicated service processor for this task, but it requires additional setup), the system boards typically support SATA disks and not SAS or SCSI, which in my experience are much more reliable and provide better feedback to the operator when they're starting to fail, and Solaris 10 currently has a major reliability problem on the x86 architecture.
If one of your Solaris 10, x86 systems goes down improperly, it's most likely _not_ going to come up without human intervention. I still don't understand the whole process, but the second stage boot loader reads a boot archive into memory; if there have been changes made to the root filesystem since the archive was last updated, the system will not boot. You'll have to fsck the disks manually, then clear the system/boot-archive service, then update it with "bootadm update-archive" and reboot. WTF? One simply cannot count on the x86 systems to come back up.
Give me a good 'ol SPARC based system with a boot ROM anyday; the x86 architecture is just plain fscked.
Re:Lets get over it already
on
Who won?
·
· Score: 1
Allowing voters to take home a "receipt" of their vote is a really bad idea. Things like voter intimidation, vote selling, and so forth are all made much easier by the voter retaining an official record of their vote.
Slashdot Mirror
Couldn't one simply contact the local police department about the problem? Harrassment is illegal whether it's committed face to face, over the phone or over the 'net.
Hell, yeah! I love Chicago!
For the love of God, don't read a newspaper or take a journalism class. Attention grabbing headlines are the norm.
IANAL, but I believe that according to postal laws that if something was shipped to you mistakenly, it's yours to keep. I would imagine that Amazon charging customers after the fact would be illegal.
How about the Slip-n-Slide? It seemed entirely appropriate that the brand was called Whammo!
Thanks a lot, now I've got the jingle from the commercial stuck in my head! I think my younger brother actually had one of these, the retractable claws in the tires were pretty cool.
That is one option, though I have not tried it. Another option is to use a different bootloader.
Just be sure to watch out for the boot archive corruption problem. The new bootloader (legacy Grub) can potentially make your Solaris 10, release 2 system much less reliable than a release 1 system.
For some reason, Grub stores a memory image of the kernel in the root filesystem. This image is loaded during the bootstrap process so that the bootloader does not have to perform I/O on the root filesystem before the kernel's available. The image gets updated via a "bootadm update-archive" when the system goes down _gracefully_.
What can burn you is if you modify something on the root filesystem (we have yet to narrow this down) but don't bring the server down or update the boot archive. If the system goes down unexpectedly while in this state, _it_will_not_boot_! The system will complain about a corrupted boot archive and require you to go into single-user mode to fix the problem. This usually requires one to clear the system/boot (IIRC) service, update the boot-archive and reboot. There's no fix for this, the only workaround is to run a cron job to update the boot archive.
We discovered this issue when one of our server rooms lost power. We spent _days_ fixing the corrupted boot archives. As far as I know, this problem is not documented in any system manuals.
A very common comment that I hear from people regarding computer security is, "we're not a target". This of course assumes that crackers select their targets based on some criteria other than they can hit your system over the 'net. Sadly, it's been my experience that when such a person's system is compromised they just want it brought back up and the particular exploit that was used remedied.
I have to disagree with this statement since end users could use a notary to manage this identity. Specifically, I'm thinking of a website that allows users to send and read encrypted messages. One would create an account on the site which would then generate the necessary crptographic keys; the user could then send encrypted email by using the website. The website would also manage other peoples' keys for the user.
I haven't entirely thought this idea through, but I'm not aware of anyone having attempted such a thing.
I thought they slept on big piles of money.
Not when you're bidding by proxy, which is what you're doing on eBay.
You tell your proxy how much you're willing to spend and the proxy then makes bids on your behalf up to your maximum amount. Apparently a lot of people don't understand this so they're engaging in self-defeating behavior. If you're going to keep contacting your proxy and increasing your maximum amount, then why are you using a proxy?
That if I get caught planting rootkits on peoples' computers that it's only going to cost me $150 per offense, with no jail time?
Some Sony executives should be serving time. Isn't planting a rootkit on someone's machine a felony in the US?
That's been my experience as well. Some time ago I was bidding on some menus from the famous Berghoff restaurant in Chicago since it was closing. I lost the auction, in which there was only one other bidder, and then received a second chance message from eBay. I'm assuming this was because the winning bidder retracted his bid. Unfortunately the second chance offer was at a higher price than I was willing to pay so I didn't respond, instead I bid on another auction for these menus. Well, that auction ended exactly the same way as the first one, but this time the seller contacted me directly to see if I was interested in buying the item directly. I didn't respond to him, but instead bid on a third auction for these items. The _third_ auction also ended the same way with some guy with only one or two previous auctions winning the item. I had been waiting for this since I began to suspect a shill bidder after the first auction and contacted eBay. I never did hear back from them, but all auctions from the seller in question were cancelled and his account was terminated.
The people that complain about sniping are the ones that don't understand how bidding by proxy works. Rather than entering their maximum bid like they should, these people put in an amount less than their max, then see if anyone raises them, then they raise their price, etc. If they're going to try to win auctions this way, then they deserve to be sniped.
You're a sucker for not buying from eBay. That's how I purchase nearly all of my electronics and I typically pay 30% to 60% less than the retail price. Sure, some of the gear is either second-hand or refurbished, but I'm saving a ton of money.
Bob Beck gave a talk on spamd at NYCBSDCon this past October. I've published some recordings of the conference proceedings, but only on DVD and CD media so they're not available on the Net. A guy named Nikolai from the NYC group also made recordings, which he's posted here:
http://www.fetissov.org/public/nycbsdcon06/
Here's a direct link to the spamd presentation. Slides are also available.
You're welcome
I've taken a couple of airplane flights recently that have had XM receivers embedded into the arm rests, so I naturally checked out the service. I really did enjoy the number of channels that were available, but there's no way I'm going to pay for such a service with all of those ads. I've pretty much eliminated television from my life, so I've grown accustomed to not seeing or hearing those advertisements. There's no way I'd ever voluntarily reintroduce them into my life.
I used to work for Learning Curve International (and then RC2 after the buy-out); they manufactured childrens toys, diecast collectibles, infant care products, etc. We had a few small internal sales teams (international, domestic and custom/premium sales) along with international distributors (United Kingdom, Australia, Germany, Japan, etc.) and independent reps/rep groups. Yes, we farmed out certain parts of our sales force, but it's incorrect to say that we farmed out sales as a whole.
I would expect that many other manufacturers do the same. They farm out some sales positions, but not the entire department.
I'm no vet, but that's the first thing I thought of when seeing the acronym. Some time ago I caught a Discovery Channel show about the MOAB. The show also talked about a new device that was deployed from an aircraft like a bomb, then split apart and threw out hundreds of these spinning discs that communicated amongst themselves and then started firing at targets. They showed a brief demo of one of the devices taking out an entire tank column.
I _really_ wish the FCC would stop trying to control markets and technologies. I can understand the issues with interference, but exactly how is a monopoly in a new and developing industry a bad thing for consumers? Isn't the first company providing services in a certain space a monopoly? Does that mean we shouldn't allow a company to come up with a new radio technology unless there's another company that's also doing it?
Being a monopoly is not evil in and of itself, it's when that monopoly uses its power to keep others out of the market that it becomes a problem. How exactly could a merger of Sirius and XM Radio keep others out of the market? It's not like they can prevent competitors from launching satellites, or buying bandwidth on someone else's satellite. Consumers will always be free to purchase a new receiver if need be.
Thanks for the info on the Sun servers supporting SAS; we've only purchased X2100, X2200 and v20Z's. I believe we only have the model 1 X2100 and X2200's, but we fortunately did spring for the service processor.
I'm aware of a workaround for the boot archive issue, and yeah we do reboot when the patches require it :) I think what's happening is that we're doing some post-install work with cfengine and are not updating the boot archive. The systems aren't typically restarted when cfengine runs since that's how we're regularly deploying updates and the systems are used for soft-realtime applications (VOIP).
I feel pretty comfortable with Solaris on the x86 systems Sun ships. It's the other vendors who may not offer support for LOM that make me nervous; some of these systems have been deployed to fairly remote facilities.
My condolences. I've managed Solaris systems for years, almost entirely SPARCs, but the new place I'm working for buys the cheap x86 junk. Now the x86 systems that Sun ships aren't bad despite some issues with the nVidia RAID chip, Intel Gigabit ethernet nics and the damn x86 BIOS, but running it on a generic 1U x86 server is a joke compared to SPARC. You've got no lights out management support (fortunately some of Sun's AMD systems come with a dedicated service processor for this task, but it requires additional setup), the system boards typically support SATA disks and not SAS or SCSI, which in my experience are much more reliable and provide better feedback to the operator when they're starting to fail, and Solaris 10 currently has a major reliability problem on the x86 architecture.
If one of your Solaris 10, x86 systems goes down improperly, it's most likely _not_ going to come up without human intervention. I still don't understand the whole process, but the second stage boot loader reads a boot archive into memory; if there have been changes made to the root filesystem since the archive was last updated, the system will not boot. You'll have to fsck the disks manually, then clear the system/boot-archive service, then update it with "bootadm update-archive" and reboot. WTF? One simply cannot count on the x86 systems to come back up.
Give me a good 'ol SPARC based system with a boot ROM anyday; the x86 architecture is just plain fscked.
Allowing voters to take home a "receipt" of their vote is a really bad idea. Things like voter intimidation, vote selling, and so forth are all made much easier by the voter retaining an official record of their vote.