Posts by bombastic bob 10507 publicly visible posts • joined 1 May 2015
I have nothing but pejoratives to describe people who actually use "identity politics" to cast their votes. Voting because someone has a particular sex, race, religion, whatever, is all the same kind of [insert profanity here]. Or, voting AGAINST based on the same [lack of] reason. It's worse than a single-issue voter.
Seriously, does ANYBODY look at POLICIES any more? Gotta use THINK instead of FEEL...
Meh, he's still a DEMO[C,N}RAT and deserves to lose whatever election he runs in, particularly if it's against Trump.
Also read the Reuters article, and it seems he likely engaged in LONG DISTANCE PHONE FRAUD back in the 80's as a teenager. Since we're now vetting politicians (and supreme court justices) based on ACTIONS TAKEN WHILE A TEENAGER (whether actual or alleged only), I think this is pretty significant.
From what I read, he was probably more of a 'Script Kiddie' than a REAL hacker anyway. Real hackers solve unsolvable problems through unconventional means, not necessarily breaking into things nor acting like a counter-culture wannabe. You usually find them doing kernel-level stuff, devices, file systems, and network security.
"history's littered with engineering projects that have failed because a priority was made of a vanity political deadline"
Or in the case of the 2nd shuttle disaster, chunks of insulation that came off during launch because of ENVIRONMENTALLY "FRIENDLY" ADHESIVE (or something like that). Yeah, they went with 'politically motivated' materials, which led to a disaster. Oops.
But still the 'politically motivated' aspect is a REAL one. So good point.
I hadn't heard that... 'Senator Launch System'.
I like the idea of multiple launches with rendezvous in space. If various rocket makers can already dock with the ISS, shouldn't be too much of a problem. If they had to, maybe they could dock ALL of the parts with the ISS and assemble it all there... (although it might require a new specialized ISS module to do it).
"Inflatable hangar module". Sounds good to me. Not sure why it makes me think of blow-up sex dolls, though...
I had to replace a fuel pump a few years ago. The engine is fuel injected and so it was a bit expensive (but under $300 as I recall). Towards end of life, it "worked" but sometimes wouldn't start spinning, leaving my car unable to start at inconvenient times (but after sitting for a bit, it would start working again). No 'check engine' light, either. Fuel pumps need replacing after 100k miles (or 10 years) or so. Probably should schedule it if you have a car that's "paid for". That, and the mass air flow sensor.
I expect that the manufacturers won't be held legally responsible if they've taken measures to STOP you from opening up the equipment. And a simple warning "high voltage inside" would be enough, I think, if they use normal screws (etc.) to hold the cover in place. Older TVs used to have these a LOT, and solid state TVs went to "no user serviceable parts inside" for the same kinds of reasons (liability).
For a time, people got used to the idea of popping the back off of a TV if it stopped working, then get an easter basket and fill it with tubes, take it to the drug store, and test 'em (along with fuses). Most of the time this would fix it. Then again, if they didn't put the RF and IF tubes back EXACTLY as they were before, it could cause other problems, but those older sets were kinda 'sloppy' so maybe it would just not behave *quite* as well afterwards... [RF and IF tubes rarely fail anyway, might as well not bother testing them, but not a lot of people would know that].
Anyway, we've had high voltage everywhere since electricity in the home. Common sense SHOULD include that basic knowledge.
" using weird screws really a big deal?"
game consoles are infamous for tri-blade screws (Nintendo) and 'torx' (XBox). I have a torx set that I purchased for 'cheap' but I still had to buy a special screwdriver to open up an XBox controller. Repairing the button silicone thingy is pretty easy, and cheap [bought a bag of them for $5 on E-bay, still have several left].
So yeah, I've run into this a few times. Sometimes you'll see 3 normal screws and one Torx screw holding the cover on. It's obvious what they intend.
(and don't EVEN get me started on repairing/replacing an XBox's DVD ROM drive...)
""suppose you bought a FORD truck and wanted to put a CHEVY motor in it"
In Cali-Fornicate-You, because of the fascist anal retentiveness of the 'smog check' laws, good luck getting your car's license renewed if you do something like that. Even a _LEGAL_ aftermarket kit [this happened to me] could be "revoked" at any time, and you might spend a few hours at a "referee" exam station to get it re-approved simply because 'smog check' techs lack the testicular fortitude to "pass" your vehicle because (even if everything else is PERFECT, which in my case it was) they see the device's serial number in the "revoked" list, and even though you bought the thing BEFORE it was "revoked", and had it installed by a nationwide exhaust/muffler business, they chicken out and "fail" you, forcing you to go to the "referee".
Worth pointing out, the "fail" costs the smog checkers money+time because apparently they can't charge you for it. But then you waste time going to the referee (which is free for the 'exam' part, but costs you TIME).
I haven't bothered to look at notepad in Win-10-nic, and really don't wanna boot up the VM right now...
Is Notepad in Win-10-nic a UWP application? If not, them I'm happy they're fixing it to (finally) handle UTF-8. If they can handle UNIX-style line endings, even better!
Otherwise, they ALREADY broke it by going to UWP.
"EASIER for their customers to claim damages from THEM if they get pwned."
yeah the lawsuit angle already exists, as far as I'm aware, but the burden of proof would be easier if they don't comply with the NIST standard. It's likely to be set as a precedent early on, by the first aggressive attorney that files the lawsuit.
"We find an issue of security. So we send an update to the device that has a security issue"
Who is this 'we' again, exactly? And that's why what you said won't work, regardless of it being snark (or not).
Mark Twain _WAS_ right. NO legislation is better than BAD, particularly if it includes something like THAT.
We (the end users) don't need THEM (the 'we' in your proposal) CONTROLLING, DICTATING, and potentially DESTROYING our devices... or our freedom.
Also, any solution that involves the private sector ALSO involves CHOICE on the part of the consumer. Taking that freedom away through regulation is another small step towards TOTALITARIANISM.
"That's how a zero-day at the manufacturer becomes a worldwide shit-storm."
Or, an "update" triggered by an MitM attack, including one that uses a VERY loud WiFi drive-by radio (using a very high gain antenna to accomplish this, not difficult) to THEN cause your home network devices to "roam" to the rogue AP (or WiFi bridge), which then becomes an MitM and THEN does things _LIKE_ inject malware in the form of firmware onto IoT devices...
Yes, it's VERY plausible. I could probably design something to do this without a whole lot of effort, by configuring a Linux laptop as a WiFi bridge, and then go from there...
That being the case, updates should NOT be mandatory, nor even SCANNED for. Maybe you get an e-mail from the company saying "We have an update to your firmware" or it appears on your phone application (if you're using one), or the web page that displays the info, and you THEN manually install the update with the ability to REVERT in case of a problem. Like that.
Yeah - mandatory updates - has worked SO well with Win-10-nic, why stop there?
"Why should a temperature controller need to know everything including the name of your maiden aunt."
I bet that sort of thing is just the unnecessary privacy violation of the provider's cloud service. THAT is a problem, too, but is less related to IoT security and more a problem with privacy-invading cloud services (in general).
not every device has to have a UL listing in the USA, but you're unlikely to find one WITHOUT UL.
Similarly, there will NOW be an IoT standard, and probably a similar labeling requirement.
It will probably (like FCC testing) require you to have some 3rd party independent laboratory conduct the appropriate tests.
And several existing 'on a chip' solutions for WiFi and Ethernet will not comply for systems that have too little memory for an SSL stack (as one example), such as things built with AVR microcontrollers (read: Arduino).
In a way this opens the door for new solutions that provide basic security, like SSL and IPSec. WiFi solutions already have WPA/WPA2 support, but no SSL. So when you contact a cloud server, the traffic is still 'in the clear'. I would expect that preventing MitM attacks and packet sniffing are high on the list for IoT security.
So yeah if an addon chip could encrypt/decrypt traffic and manage the DH key exchange, that'd be nice. something that supports I2C, serial, and SPI would be ideal.
I'm curious if any of the X11 drivers are affected by these vulnerabilities, and will Intel BOTHER to issue fixes for any of THOSE ???
Intel would do well to embrace Linux and NOT hitch their wagon to Micro-shaft, and then they'd sell MORE CHIPS because people will buy MORE new computers if they can get them, pre-installed, fully supported, WITHOUT Win-10-nic ON THEM!
But yeah, they're stuck in the mid 2000's in their thinking, I bet, and not in a GOOD way. [A _good_ way of 'naughties' thinking would be to embrace the Windows 7 and XP interfaces, but NOT the assumption that EVERY computer MUST run Windows!!!]
I think they were waiting for some hard evidence. Once it arrived, *grounded*. No crashes occurred in the USA, and so the decision was "not wrong".
A grounding of all planes of that model would disrupt airline schedules, and so I think they wanted to avoid that happening. Now that there's evidence to ground them, safety first.
I read the linked article about what the system does, and there seems to be too many "it takes over" scenarios associated with it, almost like brakes in your car that apply themselves in situations where it would be smarter to accelerate or steer around something.
In the case of a stall detect in which the instrumentation had iced up (let's say), it could drive a plane into the ground, if I interpret things correctly.
Pilots are probably used to using the 'on the yoke' trim adjustment, but apparently if you flip to 'manual trim control', you have to spin a handwheel instead, NOT something a pilot would normally want to do. And going to 'manual trim' apparently disables the system, but it seems kind of *obscure* to me that THIS is the only way to shut it off.
I think an alarm should sound, warning the pilot, before this automated system kicks in. Something like "stall alert" followed by a well documented 'correction' operation that's also announced, and a BIG FAT KILL SWITCH to take it off line in case it was caused by instrument error.
Anyway, FAA will now investigate no doubt and come up with something. Boeing will have to re-certify, I bet.
yeah but from what the article said about every device having a DHCP client, it ALMOST sounded like the DHCP CLIENT was vulnerable...
But I remember an earlier article about the server flaw, and I'm sure I snarked all over that.
I agree with the 'just say no'. The MShaft DHCP server is WORTHLESS. I just use bind for DNS with isc-dhcpd on a Linux or FreeBSD box. It has worked for me for nearly 2 decades, and was relatively painless to set up with a short RTFM session.
I want to get an overall 3D Skeuomorphic look back. But the ARROGANT MILLENIAL TWITS at Micro-shaft won't do that. This means I use Windows 7 until they PRY IT FROM MY COLD DEAD COMPUTER. Or, switch to Wine or a VM on Linux for those applications I must still run.
But of course, for the Start Menu itself, you knew about the old 'Classic Start Menu' replacements, right? They still exist, though some of the names have changed... was one called 'Classic Shell' but I don't know what it is now.
I suggest they include a "Fuck OFF!" button to PERMANENTLY stop ALL nagging, but that would make too much sense...
(yeah I haven't run windows update on my 7 boxen and VMs in a while, now, and dno't plan on it anyway, I never surf the web on them, they work fine as-is, and they're behind a firewall of MY OWN DESIGN. And I practice "safe surfing" on the web, from my non-windows machines and devices. Should not have any problems for a LONG time to come!)
as for radiation, consider this:
a) a large tank of fuel or water would act as a radiation shield, so keep that oriented between the 'people tank' (aka living quarters) and the sun, and the radiation levels will be a LOT lower.
b) it will be a great experiment on dealing with long term space exposure to ionizing radiation, how to minimize it, maybe even how to work WITH it
A lot of people work in the nuclear industry and receive many times the average dosage of radiation that you get from living on the planet (around 100mrem per year, which is what , 1 milli-S or something). The legal limits used to be 50 times that amount for radiation workers, in the USA anyway. Worthy of mention, when I was on a sub underway my annual exposure was about 50% lower, even though I lived/worked within 100 feet of an operating nuclear reactor. All of that steel and the ocean itself was a pretty good radiation shield.
So yeah given a properly designed space station, the presence of fuel tanks and water tanks and metal between you and the sun, and possible additional shielding on the living quartes, it should work pretty well.
But yeah you'll get more radiation. Just monitor it, as is done in the nuclear industry, and keep it well below established limits, and everyone will be fine.
coolness factor alone is a reason to go to the moon.
Also, it's an un-mined resource of minerals. It's a fair bet someone will find gold, platinum, rare earth materials, and other (similar) things there. When it becomes financially viable to mine the moon, it will be mined. And the things we want will be a) closer to the surface, and b) unclaimed by governments so you don't have to deal with international politics to get to the resources and bring 'em home.
"I'd be surprised if there was the infrastructure in space for that many people to have anywhere to go after they were launched."
Just as aircraft capable of carrying 100 people can ALSO carry a few people [and a LOT of cargo], I would expect that the plans are to bring lots of 'people + cargo' for a few years to construct something _LIKE_ the '2001 A space Odyssey' spinny station. And at that point, it will make sense.
You got to be a bit of a visionary to connect the dots.
"Why is NASA persisting with the SLS?"
Well, apparently THAT is the entire issue here. Privatization by using Boeing and/or SpaceX rockets to do the trick is what we're going to get, apparently. And this is a GOOD thing. And, although NASA _does_ use private industry to develop things _like_ SLS, it seems that their way of designing new propulsion systems doesn't work very well any more. It's too slow, is filled with cost overruns and delays, and that's not going to cut it when people don't want to fund you with infinite funds.
The original moon program had a goal and a time frame, and it was tied in with military technology for launching atomic weapons. That was THEN. NASA is now focused on science and research, not RESULTS, and both science AND research extend outwards indefinitely, _ESPECIALLY_ when "science" and "research" are the goal, and NOT _results_.
That being said, NASA still has its purpose, especially for coordinating launches, setting standards, etc.. I think they do really well at those things.
But yeah, let the FREE MARKET compete and produce launch systems that get us the RESULTS, because that's what the majority of citizens seem to want, RESULTS.
[it's like fusion RESEARCH - you get what you pay for - RESEARCH. If it were fusion RESULTS that were being funded, we'd have power producing reactors by now]
icon, because, irony
yeah, forking _might_ fix things, or restore compatibility. But what worries me is THIS (from the article):
"The Insider team itself merely pointed out there were some new emojis – rather than explaining Microsoft had taken the step of spotting a problem in the OS that was stopping it working with a popular FOSS component and getting the code tweaked in a matter of weeks."
They *FEEL* (not think) that _EMOJIS_ are more important than KERNEL FIXES??? Well, from this, it would seem that this is the case... (and I _think_ that emojis are a faddish cancer, like 70's disco "music" - 110bpm 'thunka thunka' for EVERY song, with 2 or maybe even 3 chords for anything NOT written by 'Earth Wind and Fire', heavily repeated like code you did copy/pasta with instead of writing a function, and pounded into your head and pressed out of plastic and over-played on radio "until you like it" and IT! JUST! REFUSED! TO! DIE! even after being spectacularly blown up by DJs like Steve Dahl, but I digress)
Worth pointing out also, virtualbox STARTED as a QEMU fork and the first really cool feature they added: multi-core support!
(is that in QEMU yet? I haven't messed with QEMU at 'that level' in a while)
heh a downvote - not sure why you'd downvote THIS particular pithy wisdom, but in case you were wondering...
from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spaghetti_code
In a 1980 publication by the United States National Bureau of Standards, the phrase spaghetti program was used to describe older programs having "fragmented and scattered files"
In the 1978 book A primer on disciplined programming using PL/I, PL/CS, and PL/CT, Richard Conway used the term to describe types of programs that "have the same clean logical structure as a plate of spaghetti"
So, like THAT. Then again, a downvote probably came from a member of my "fan club" and was probably directed at me personally, and not at the content
*kisses* heh heh heh
I always keep downloaded install images in a safe place NOT that's writeable by a windows OS. So it'd be a pain to re-install, but CERTAINLY I wouldn't put it past M-shaft at some point to even CONSIDER this (we had to remove "XXX" because of "update install problem") even if it's M-shaft's fault to begin with...
However, with so many people scrutinizing their update process [due to last year's total pooch-screw updates], I doubt they'd get away with it.
it should be known as the "Sinofsky/Larson-Greene" maneuver, where you take a perfectly good software product (Windows 7) that the customers like, and THEN turn it into a grotesque monstrosity that angers a good number (if not majority) of your existing customers and gives them NO CHOICE AT ALL but to use this, uh, *THING*, in spite of that.
And you do it ALL in the name of "providing updates" that ARE ONLY NECESSARY SINCE YOU COULD NOT GET THINGS RIGHT THE _FIRST_ TIME AND DID NOT TEST ENOUGH!!! And you sneak in "feature creep" while you're at it, INSTEAD of fixing the problems!!! And occasionally, you BREAK THINGS EVEN WORSE.
*cough* - I guess that covers it.
"without installation delays during takeoff."
"Stewardess my computer is installing updates"
"Let me see" - takes laptop, throws it out the door, shuts the door. "OK, anyone else unable to shut down any personal electronics?"
(At this point you see a number of people just pulling the batteries out)
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
