"pull off the hacks"
I like that. I hope the hacks do too.
But more seriously, it's all well and good until someone gets prosecuted for writing something like Snort or Nmap.
239 publicly visible posts • joined 21 Jun 2010
"Is that all it takes in your world to shut down opposition?"
Ah, spoken like a true Trumpeter.
You expressed an opinion. You are free to do so.
I disagreed with that opinion. I am also free to do so.
You have not been "shut down", I have not delved in to El Reg's servers and deleted your comment. Your opinion still stands, and I still think it is wrong.
Free speech at its best.
The rest of what you said isn't worth my time arguing with - one of your points is simple pedantry, the other shows you haven't really been paying attention. So I'll freely ignore it.
You're forgetting your history, John.
Net Neutrality was in trouble, and the laws now in progress were hard fought for (as per the article) so that everyone is equal on the internet, and a low cost startup could compete with massive companies (which could afford higher carrier costs)
If this is being brushed away, it is bad for net neutrality and it is bad for us. Therefore calling it "bad" is not a bias, but the truth. Unless, of course, you don't like "net neutrality" ?
"At the moment it looks as if they wand to do it in one year."
Do what in one year? Recoup an unknown amount of money that you and I have no idea of, at a rate which is unknown to us?
I think you've lost the thread, Ivan: You've made an assumption which isn't based in facts we are in possession of.
This is no different to when your bank changes your mortgage interest rates by more than the BOE base rate has shifted: They are (ostensibly) trying to hedge against risks and expenses so on that we aren't privy to, based on timelines we don't understand.
Absolutely agree.
This is what many people are missing in subjects such as this - Microsoft pay a lot of money up front to fit out their datacentres, and it costs them a lot of money in both engineers and replacement kit to keep it going.
They invested a lot of money up front to get this going, with a view to making back that investment with a profit over many years.
Therefore, price-setting is done based on forecasts of how much kit and talent is going to cost them over the next few years, whilst trying to make back on the initial investment as well.
They need to maintain a "war chest" for kit replacement, based on forecasts of how often kit will need replacing and how much that kit might cost. And they need to get back that investment such that over 5 to 10 years they make an overall profit.
Trying to pretend it is all about the current exchange rate and current costs is very dubious. And using such poor logic to bootstrap another argument about how angry we should be and how hard done by we are by our own poor decisions is astonishingly bad taste.
And just to caveat this, I HATE being put in a position where I need to defend or justify MS. But I hate sloppy logic, terrible critical thinking and poor foresight even more.
I'm going to put my "Pretending I don't know much about how this stuff works" hat on and say it is the Router's fault.
The router's job is to split, splice and forward packets. If the packets are malformed, they should be dropped, otherwise they should be passed (within the bounds of any rules programmed in to the router). It should not be possible to crash a router by sending "bad" packets to it, and if a particular router can be crashed in this way then this leaves open a trivial DoS attack on said router.
It's not all that different to a user typing data in to an application - if the app crashes because the user mistyped bad data in to it, that is the app's fault: it should be validating its input and complaining appropriately.
Without that hat on, I know this is easier said than done, because networking is hard.
"But if you think that the software that you have now will need more changes before final release (which is what Linus is saying), then by definition, the current software can't be a release candidate, since you don't intend to release it (as the final product)."
I see what you're saying. But Linus is just talking about how he "feels" about this particular RC. He expects it will fail testing in some way and that there will be another RC afterwards.
But that is just a feeling, and the current RC may pass all tests quite adequately.
By advertising this feeling to his team, he is asking them to really, properly hammer this RC in testing, and he is also making sure they are ready to expect to have to patch more bugs (as opposed to going in to "holiday mode"). This is simply good, transparent management and effective communication.
/usr
@DoctorSyntax: "That depends on what single user mode needs. If it needs executables moved from /sbin to /usr..."
I'm not bothered by this change of "moving /bin and /sbin to /usr" and it doesn't affect this.
I was saying to the chap above that if he partitions properly and separates out /home and /var (leaving /usr on the root partition), then he won't need to boot from usb or cd or whatever.
Single User Mode in Linux will boot fine from here. As would temporarily changing the boot commandline to run /bin/bash instead of init (for fixing really broken systems).
That's a big "if". My systems do not do this.
"failure to boot due to unmountable drives" will be a problem if one of your filesystems is corrupted. But it doesn't mean the system is "unbootable" - simply boot in to single user mode (no rescue disk/cd/USB needed) and fix.
Even though I use it, I blame Ubuntu (and other distros) for making people forget some very good old habits, such as sane partitioning.
The physical disk failing is only one of many corruption scenarios.
It is still wise, if you don't want to faff with booting off CD, to have a separate /, /var and /home partitions. This means the system will likely still be bootable if corruption occurs, because the / partition is rarely written to and is therefore unlikely to get corrupted. A corruption in the oft-written to /var and /home partitions cannot make the system unbootable.
I'm glad to see that this change Debian are making will not affect us being able to sensibly partition our systems for stability.
"So even the good boffin himself thinks it's most likely just the polls were wrong ..."
You're halfway there.
A "good boffin" considers all possibilities and considers the likelihood of each one.
He has, in this case, identified at least two possibilities and has attributed equal likelihood to each of the two most likely, and says there should be some investigation (or "measurement" as a "boffin" might say)
Considering, measuring and testing hypothesis is the basis of science.
Considering and testing every hypothesis and not prematurely throwing any away because of political or other beliefs is the basis of *good* science.
Haha - awesome. Two thumbs down from people who find it hard to connect "This exploit has just been discovered" with "Oh shit, a hacking group has commoditised the exploit, unleashed it on every IoT device and are hiring it out to any kiddie scripter that can pay"
...which are two of the most often written articles on the Register...
" let's spend those billions on getting to Mars sooner rather than later"
Yeah sure, that's fair enough.
But remember - there are no shortcuts, there is only "the right way" and "the slightly longer way that might appear cheaper in the short term but you might need to throw the whole thing away and start again later"
The cheap short term option is to not waste those "billions" now.
The "[short] right way" is to sterilise the probes so we don't waste X*billions and many years later.
"what do you reckon are the odds that a bunch of bacteria will stop it if the technology matures to the point where its feasible?"
Those odd are, as you imply, a certainty (given enough time, anything is a certainty)
But it will be cheaper and easier overall to sterilise a probe now than a whole planet later.
If Mars contains bacterial life, it would be nice to be able to study it before accidentally killing the whole species through contamination.
Same goes for any full-size LGMs living underground.
And in that case, I'd like to think we wouldn't go inhabit Mars if we find any LGM there. It is their planet, not ours.
It would also be good to know that the bacteria we captured there isn't just random Earth bacteria which we stupidly brought with us.
And we may find that if we leave bacteria there and it can survive in those conditions, that the Martian conditions cause it to mutate in to something particularly odd and nasty, killing us all the first time we take off our helmets after terraforming.
"Please explain how we could leave the EU and remain in the EEA, AND fulfil the xenofobic wishes of the Leave campaign?"
Well, we can't, can we - Which is what makes the referendum question we were asked so odd (in hindsight, unfortunately)
Absolutely.
The "Leave" commentary I read online mostly has all the maturity and nuance of a toddler with an uneaten ice-cream screaming blue murder because their brother just glanced at it.
Leave people: You won. Get over it. Now, pretty please let's have a constructive chat about how we best do this thing you want.
Indeed.
Also, this bit bothers me:
"Among the charges Ullah faces is an allegation that he had a USB stick disguised as a cufflink, which had "an operating system loaded on to it for a purpose connected with the commission, preparation or instigation of terrorism" contrary to section 57 of the Terrorism Act 2000."
So he had a USB stick loaded with Kali Linux?
And just to chuck in my two cents...
It is a pain in the backside to use in a proper development environment because you can't follow the "source control -> tag -> promote tagged version to live, copy DB to live" method which keeps things sane.
URLs are hardcoded in the DB and so the DB needs much fiddling with to move it between URLs.
Consequently, it is common to find that production Wordpress websites are edited in place, rather than edited, tested and promoted cleanly to production.
Because the low-value targets often contain a trail of breadcrumbs to the higher-value ones.
Maybe the server has links to other servers.
Maybe some of the credentials on there are the same as for other servers.
Maybe some malware could be installed on it which harvests passwords from Trump logging in to check his mail (you could even cleverly make it reject his password once, so he tries another one - now you have two passwords to try against his Linked In or Gmail accounts)
"Isn't that for goods only?"
Maybe, I don't know huge amounts about that detail of it, I'm just using the bad bits of it as an example of what govts are being pressured to give up when it comes to "modern" trade deals.
If we put ourselves in a position where we /need/ to sign one rather than being able to look at it objectively as an eventual replacement for something which is currently in, ok and working, then we will not be able to bargain as hard as we would like, and will have to accept the other party's terms.
lol, of course it has been slow for the EU and Canada to agree to CETA - it is full of terms that no one wants, so the negotiating parties keep having to, err, negotiate.
It'll be much quicker if Canada wants a "CETA" with the UK, because the UK will just say "YES, YES, YES!" and damn the consequences. It's what we do with trade deals. I heard some of our best and brightest Tories were the ones pushing hardest for getting the EU to sign TTIP, although I hope I heard wrong on this.
The govt will probably even have the gall a few years later to talk on the tellybox about how totally unfair it is that we can now be sued by any opencast miner or rubbish incinerator that we withhold planning permission from. They'll then hope that no one remembers them doing the deal and launch one of their lovely, speedy "inquiries", which will provide no conclusions or way out of the mess. That's the way things normally work around here, isn't it?