Re: ...we do approve of exploring and learning and having fun...
A lot but not everyone.
Certainly not Steve "you can play with very high voltage at least once"...
In his defence, he was correct
1020 publicly visible posts • joined 1 Oct 2009
As far as I am aware, Windows has supported multiple NTP servers from the command line since Windows 2000:
net stop w32time
w32tm /config /manualpeerlist:"0.pool.ntp.org,0x1 1.pool.ntp.org,0x1 time.google.com,0x1" /syncfromflags:manual /update
net start w32time
Alter your NTP servers as appropriate - try and use in-country pools for personal use.
You wouldn't buy a video of a film.
And then a DVD of the same film because the video got damaged.
And then another DVD of the same film after a friend borrowed it.
And then another DVD because a child scratched it and you thought you might want to watch it again.
And then another on bluray after your daughter's boyfriend took it as part of a breakup.
And then another copy. And another. And another.
I think I've identified who the real victim is.
"With Microslop — complete borkage is inevitable."
The number of patches is increasing significantly (Windows CVEs were around 200/year from 1999-2012, increased by 100/year until a spike in 2020 before settling around the 900-1000/year mark in 2024) and we seem to be on track for 2000+ in 2026.
We have to acknowledge Windows flaws and that they need patched - we cannot rule out AI continuing to increase its patch output, maybe even giving a target boom or bust date where Windows is patched or fully booked...
"Not really an LLM problem, more of a cost-benefit/ethics issue"
Definitely not an LLM issue - it's a breach of contract issue because of the actions taken rather than the source of the "advice".
Not being willing to pay for lawyers that are willing to engage in morally dubious activities and instead using ChatGPT which ultimately results in chat logs being presented in court just provides a little more humour on the path from f***ing around to finding out.
IPX would have required either a proxy (I.e. Novell Bordermanger - not sure if there were any others that supported IPX) or dual stack IP/IPX.
My guess is that they were using a Burdermanager proxy as that would explain the lack of default route. The Bordermanger could potentially still get Internet access via proxy ARP but it would have been flakey as proxy ARP suffers under load. If so, the tech likely did fix things by adding a default route in the right place and testing on a native IP client would show things looked healthy but clients using Bordermanger still had to deal with it's reliability.
I've only ever dealt with one customer who used Novell Bordermanger with IPX clients - it always seemed like a problem looking for a small problem in order to make a much, much larger problem.
The link says "1.5 GW Caterpillar G3520K generation (firm order, delivery March 2026)"
The Cat G3520K is a 97.6 litre, 20 cylinder engine designed to run on low pressure natural gas and generate 2552–2567 ekW (at 50/60 Hz).
Running ~600 gen sets seems rather optimistic and about 25% less efficient than three large 500MW CCGT's although they probably require regulatory permission and I believe the smaller units may not be.
Or we could just acknowledge that the design is fundamentally flawed and avoid wasting the Ukrainian's time.
And if manufacturers/UK defence decision makers need more evidence, have Ukrainian's "donate" some to Russians desperate for vehicles and let them demonstrate the flaws rather than harming allies....
Previous articles have identified regulatory issues (i.e. the EU) and that the big two cloud providers (AWS and then Azure) pulling away from their competitors driving consolidation within the industry.
With only Google looking like they could be a viable competitor outside of regional niches based on investment (unless you believe Oracle/OpenAI can deliver on their contract), the pressure to provide multi-cloud is more about covering off future consolidation than customer flexibility.
Multicloud is less of a threat to further growth of the duopoly now that it is entrenched and smaller players can be priced out of future data centre contracts (if not on current contracts, then during the next 5 year round of contracts and infrastructure refresh) - it almost becomes a requirement for futher consolidation.
I thought Nestle grew by buying up water rights in areas they operated and charged everyone excessive pricing because "the idea that water is a human right "extreme." (Quote from Nestle CEO Brabeck-Letmathe in 2019).
Having said that, it is a useful comparison because the big 7 seems to want a monopoly on AI and by extension, water, electricity, data centres and leading edge semiconductors and the rest of the world doesn't matter.
I think you're overly focused on the cost to taxpayers and are completely ignoring the benefits that outsourcing responsibility and accountability to a third party bring to senior management.
Anyway, enough if this unChristmasy behavior, I have to find an Atos salesperson to take me out for ""an in-depth review" at the local...
There were almost 1600 incidents since 2021 of ATM jackpotting (https://www.justice.gov/d9/styles/banner/public/2025-12/picture2_0.jpg?itok=n4AAriXN) and while I don't believe they are attributable to one criminal organization the reported losses ($40m) now exceed the cost of the -5000 annual bank robberies in the US (~$35m).
The UK and Europe experienced issues with ATM jackpotting around 10-12 years and ATMs were either upgraded to address the issues or removed from some locations. Rather than declaring ~54 people "terrorists", I would have imagined banks upgrading their ATMs and police/FBI working together to apprehend criminals (which they appear to have done...) would have avoided the need to use the terrorist bogeyman...
While I have similar experiences aearching even when giving pretty good hints, maybe we aren't the target for Amazons sales AI?
Put another way, maybe Amazon have optimiser for sales revenue versus what we are interested in buying and improving search for...informed?...customers risks losing sales elsewhere.
"Well I for one would urge someone to give Poettering a ginormous IPv6 allocation in the hope we never hear from him or systemd ever again."
Or....systemd is able to allocate a truly unique loopback to every local application to avoid the dreaded "address already in use"error without having to worry about exhausting 127/8
It's not the DNS lifetime that caused the issue - it's the inability to create new DNS entries that stalls/stops provisioning resulting in a feedback loop that further overloads provisioning as failures generate even more provisioning requests.
I believe it means that if AWS experiences a major Issue with it's provisioning service, within 60 minutes (an SLA rather than how quickly they can potentially enable this feature), they will allow an alternative method of provisioning resources.
My guess is that AWS have preallocated a limited emergency range of DNS/IP mappings that can be safely allocated in an emergency and don't require DB access. That relieves pressure on the DynamoDB solution to allow key organisations to recover faster and probably allow AWS to recover faster as well.
I would suggest you are looking at the problem from the wrong direction. The issue isn't existing DNS mappings. They work.
It's new mappings. You have to be able to create/delete records to flex services up
/down/between data centres (US-EAST-1 is a collection of around 100 large data centres) and each new instance that is required to cope with increased load or the migration of load between your capacity groupings (i.e. a data centre hall is likely the smallest grouping)
Once your DNS move/add/delete process is delayed, demand will create a situation where key services reach capacity and then you enter the downward spiral of no capacity to cope with current load and no ability to increase capacity.
This ignores any systems used to avoid this situation (DNS planner and DNS Enactor) - my assumption is that something triggered the DNS issue such as maintenance/power outages causing a loss of data centre capacity causing some of the initial demand issues, because historically, that has been the cause of a large number of previous US-EAST-1's outages.
It's worth noting that a number of AWS people have said that US-EAST-1 is too big to be stable BUT customers want it and it provides valuable data for how to run other AWS regions reliably as they have been built to avoid the extreme scale issues US-EAST-1 has. Ref: https://www.theregister.com/2024/04/10/aws_dave_brown_ec2_futures/ and
"Went from a first mover advantage, to loser last in 2 decades."
IBM may have had a capacity advantage in the pre-cloud environment, but cloud required bigger, more efficient data centres and IBM wasn't willing to invest to compete with it's rivals.
It didn't take IBM two decades to lose their advantage - it took 3-5 years and arguably less as many of it's data centres lacked the geographic advantages of being close to power suppliers or locations where data centre density allowed IBM to exploit their existing locations.
Rather than an advantage, IBM had a significant disadvantage of significant opex, a lack of capex and management that was unwilling to change course.
It's an interesting comparison between Google and Oracle. Both were unable to keep pace with the huge infrastructure spend or AWS and Azure.
Google specialised to try and make their spend sustainable. While they have challenges, they also have some very sizeable revenue streams even as search falters.
Oracle fell behind for years, depending on renting space rather than building like the others.
Then OpenAI comes along and signs a deal that promises expansion at rates that AWS or Azure would be laughed at for suggesting. The lead times required for power and planning new builds make it time consuming and competition for existing space drives up pricing. Sure, you can get lucky a few times, but Oracle has to get lucky for years and years...
The advisory is for organisations to:
- patch equipment
- remove any end of life equipment ASAP as at best, it has another month of vendor support.
Insert whatever vendor you wish into those statements and it remains true.
While it would be nice if Cisco or any other vendor could write perfect code that anticipated any possibility, we have to accept reality isn't that perfect.
I'm wondering how you got from "a surveillanceware company" and "targeting individuals" to the UK government being involved? It looks like German and US companies were responsible for the software rather than known UK surveillanceware companies.
Amnesty International report "Shadows if Control" suggested this was being used in Pakistan and more widely against journalists.