Posts by bombastic bob 10283 publicly visible posts • joined 1 May 2015
https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ножки_Буша
I ran that through google translate - "Bush's Legs"
(translated quote from the page)
The name "Bush's legs" appeared in 1990, when a trade agreement was signed between Mikhail Gorbachev and George Bush Sr. on the delivery of frozen chicken legs to the USSR. Since in 1990 the Soviet counters were practically empty , "Bush's legs" were very popular.
in case nobody else bothered to check. Brilliant reference!
"would save my servers from having to deal with about 80% of the tens of thousands of malicious probes each is subjected to daily."
Well, you could set up 'fail2ban'. that'd cut down on a LOT of it. that way you only get like 5 failed sshd login attempts (then it auto-bans the IP address for half an hour or whatever) instead of hundreds over a period of hours. And it generates complaint reports that you can forward on to ISPs if you want. I do it sometimes, depending on how irritating the robo-crackers are. [they have to EARN a complaint because I'm lazy, but not so lazy that I can't give "special attention" to our "special friends", heh heh heh "Warner Brothers" style]
"With blackjack and hookers no doubt..."
no, they're the 'new moralists'. They can't allow pr0n, gambling, naughty jokes, fun, etc. on THEIR internet.
The "blackjack and hookers" will only be available if you have "special access" credentials... (i.e. THEM, but in a way that the general public won't find out about)
"that price cap will mysteriously vanish"
yep. I suspect Mercedes might be interested in making a competing model to the Tesla, for the same market.
Interestingly enough, those who can AFFORD these things DO! NOT! NEED! A! SUBSIDY!!!
(so why IS there a subsidy, anyway? yeah I know why, and it's stupid)
Asus would do BETTER supporting an article that talked about how they were shipping LOTS of reasonably priced Acer laptops pre-installed with Linux and a bootloader that bypasses Intel's "management crap"...
(I think THAT kind of 'sponsorship' would go over SO well, that enough El Reg readers would buy them to make it SPECTACULARLY PROFITABLE to do so... so GROW A CLUE, Asus, if you read this...)
"There is the Xbox if they want to experiment with AR, VR and stupid GUIs."
But I don't like it much THERE, either... (live ad tiles on XBox, for example). I skip that part of the "show" and just play the games. It's the only reason I own one (well, more than one, but they keep breaking, and I won't get an 'XBox One' and I want 100% compatibility - my NEXT gaming platform will probably be a play station, unless THEY get as bad as M$ is with the XBox One, then I'll be happy playing 'Star Ocean' and Final Fantasy XIII's for a while until "next box").
Big Thumbs Up for the rest of the post, though, specifically this:
"Stop with Flat and faffing around with wizards and removing settings."
"What's the AR/VR equvilent of W.I.M.P.?"
I think there was a good example of it in the third 'Matrix' movie when you saw the computer AI system that people with plugs in their heads were interacting with, move your hands and touch a virtual display that's suspended in midair, things like that.
But until we have a UI that makes _THAT_ possible, it's just more "new, shiny" to hype a sow with lipstick on it (and not even on the OINKY end) called "Windows 10" aka "Win-10-nic".
QUESTION: Why does Micro-shaft spend SO much time and money and effort on THIS (playing 'catch up' to Google and Apple, basically) while *SIMULTANEOUSLY* ignoring the *FACT* that their UNPOPULAR OPERATING SYSTEM has a *CRAP* *UI* that looks like it was designed in **1985** (like windows 1.0).
Micro-shaft: GET RID OF THE 2D FLATSO, the ADWARE, and the SPYWARE. When you get THAT right, people will like your OS whether it has 3D AR/VR or not.
icon, because Micro-shaft FAIL OS.
"A TLD for your own internal LAN should be doable without having to pay a rentier to do it properly."
yourname.local <-- try that. set up your DNS server using 'bind', hook it in with the isc DHCP server, and voila! works for me, since, like, forever, LONG before RFC6762 was written. May require Linux or BSD, to work properly.
I can't remember where I first read about '.local' though. It wasn't in the RFCs as I recall, but it may have been mentioned in IANA or ICANN documents someplace. It was related to the use of '.localhost' for ONLY the loopback, and '.local' for anything in a private address space.
A quick google search shows that Micro-shaft recommends it for domain controllers. Maybe THAT is where I first read about it, back in the 90's, setting up a windows NT 4 server domain controller for testing.
Worthy of note: according to SOME several-year-old intarwebs references, Apple's mDNS stuff attempts (or used to attempt) to resolve a "name.local" name differently than a DNS lookup, by assuming they're multicast-only, but "name.whatever.local" appeared to work properly. Just to point it out, anyway.
"Then don't use a domain name you do not own. Your own domain and .local are both good"
etc.
I've been using ".local" for my own domain since the 90's. Prior to that I made up my own TLD but after reading up on it, it seemed that it was a bad idea (even back then).
I'd had some problems with a customer VPN setup that used the registered domain for their web site as their "windows domain". That caused lots of problems when VPN'ing into their network (as well as their router and network setup in general - they insisted on using the common/default 192.168.1.x address space, forcing my private LAN to use something else in order to VPN into them).
in any case, it's welcome that there's an RFC for '.local' (6762) but it shouldn't be restricted to ONLY multicast at any point in the future, either. RFC6762 might need an ammendment RFC to clarify that '.local' should be reserved for "general use" and NOT assumed to be multi-cast.
anyway, "companyname.local" works VERY VERY WELL for a corporate domain (for internal network addresses). I expect zillions of BOFH's and IT specialists have done this.
"I hope it isn't a CEO vanity project, that would be really sad."
Most likely it IS.
I think that they should be hiring TEST ENGINEERS instead, to deal with NOT having the end-users as their beta testers.
And now, MY top 10 list of new names for the 'Redmond Campus':
10. Nutsy-Cuckoo-land
9. 'Hallowed Halls of Redmond' (I use that a lot anyway)
8. Spyware Heights
7. "The Store"
6. Adware Haven
5. Flatso Metro
4. BSOD
3. Lost Wages (due to various forms of outsourcing and hiring n00bs)
2. Snarf-ville
and the number 1 new name for the Redmond Campus is...
"You can't pronounce it, because it's that stupid sideways ASCII-smiley emoticon you often see emblazened in the middle of your flat-looking screen"
"Actually, a taskbar will be of help here since it can make you aware a browser window's still open."
a good point. There may be a way to have it display "iconless" though. I haven't tried. But if it's a top level window, it will most likely be in any task bar that has icon windows listed in it.
I run Mate with the upper panel having the CPU monitor in it. If I see unusual CPU activity, I typically kill that application and re-start it. Usually it's Firefox, due to garbage collection and being left open on 7 virtual desktops with 20 or 30 tabs for days or weeks on end. Sometimes it's something else. but if you see consistently high CPU usage, it's often a problem with the application. And if it's bitcoin mining, THAT would put a stop to it REALLY QUICK.
That, and running 'NoScript'.
"I'm old fashioned enough never to have been a fan of sudo"
well, if you configure sudo the way a BOFH would, you can lock out anything that's truly "dangerous" and require actually logging in as root for such things.
but most distros that have sudo simply allow any authenticated user to enter his own password to do "whatever he wants" with root credentials. It's convenient, yeah.
"but usually physical access is enough to set the root password on *nix."
not entirely true. On FreeBSD, at least, it is possible to require the root password for single-user mode by specifying that the console is 'insecure'. And, Shirley, you COULD also boot a "live CD" (assuming that hasn't been locked out) or "live USB" image, and then mount the hard drive's root partition and do a password reset THAT way (jumping through necessary hoops to do so via the command line) but you can do this in Windows as well.
Or, if you're really desperate, remove the hard drive and plug it into a different computer that has the correct utilities on it for a password reset.
(I'd much rather make miscreants go through that last step)
"How do you create a really secure password?"
Having forked FBSD's userland, it should be possible to create a random root password with command line tools (like 'pw') assuming those tools exists on a mac...
then you can just do the 'sudo su' trick when you want to do things as 'root' for a while...
"By that definition every state in the USA is a nation"
correct, and the constitution is 'supreme law of the land' (in case there are any deviations).
It's supposed to be hierarchical, the concept being that individual states and localities should have as much power and authority as possible, because they know best how to deal with their own people properly.
THAT being said, there's always overreach, because, gummint. Fixing that probably means electing different people, who (hopefully) will 'fix it'. [good luck, yeah]
Worth noting, the 'Native American' (aka American Indian) tribes are also separate governments, under the U.S. government (like a combination of state and local governments). So if you commit a crime on an Indian reservation, you're subject to THEIR laws, too.
(worth noting, I have an ancestor from 3 generations back who was a member of the Taos tribe in New Mexico, but I don't claim it on any forms to get 'affirmative action' because it would be stupid)
"s it actually illegal to hack a government that routinely violates it's own Constitution, spies on people in all jurisdictions without evidence, breaches the local laws of all countries" etc.
Unfortunately, YES. That's why a LOT of us over here in the U.S. want to "drain the swamp" and fix the REAL problem. It beats ignoring the laws and going to jail.
As for extradition - the UK court needs to decide that. If it's NOT warranted, he won't get extradited.
(if I were the UK government, I'd want to be rid of the expensive trial and incarceration anyway)
"asking her to put her socks on can end up in all out war."
rebellion. yeah, kids NEVER do THAT. heh.
I have to wonder what justification she puts behind NOT wearing socks. "I don't like them" [even irrationally] would explain a lot.
I wonder if she would object so much to an alternative like tights or nylons [depending on her age]. Just a thought. (maybe you could give her the alternative of "this" or "that" where you win either way - a Xanatos gambit, but SHE gets to control which one - so from her perspective, she wins)
"you really think 99 years in jail is a fair and just sentence for what he did?"
If I steal 99 cars, should my sentence be higher than stealing just one?
Anyway, that's probably what's involved in the 99 year figure. We won't know until it all comes out in the trial.
"It's about revenge."
Well, SOCIETY's revenge, yeah. But what's MORE important is DETERRENCE. You know, a few high profile crimes being tried and debated and talked about and the sentence is SO BAD that people say "I better not do that, I don't want to go to jail for a LOOONG time like that!"
That's the idea, anyway. It's why there's still capital punishment for murder.
It's also why, when I hear about a criminal who's shot to death by a cop, I say things like "It would be better if he had not died. THEN he would have to go through the trial and jail sentence. Getting shot to death by a cop during the commission of a crime was getting off EASY."
back in the day, I knew this guy who wanted me to help him break into government computers. This was before anyone had heard about 'hacking' or 'hackers'. This was when the internet was still called "the Arpanet" and the Apple II hadn't been released yet. I told this guy "I don't want ANYTHING to do with ANYTHING like that" and probably mentioned something about "Iron bar hotel" as someplace I did NOT want to go. He ended up going there. And when he did, he had written down my name in his "book". And since I was in the Navy at the time he was arrested, I had to explain all of that to an N.I.S. investigator. It wasn't very fun. I didn't even know the guy's real name, just the handle he always went by - 'Alroandukar'. So every time they asked me about what I knew about this guy, I was really trying hard to think about who they were talking about... And then it was like "Oh, THAT guy. I told him ..." etc.
"Plenty of people get through life on autistic spectrum"
I suggest that AD[H]D, certain 'autism spectrum disorders', etc. are simply a means by which CERTAIN PEOPLE are trying VERY hard to DIAGNOSE "Success" as A DISORDER.
AD[H]D - an advantage if you are a hunter, if you are in the military, if you are a policeman or fireman, where you must react quickly to rapid changes in the environment that might KILL you.
'Ass-Burgers' - not giving a Flying Fornicate about things like 'political correctness' and instead, having too much intelligence to fall for ridiculous "social cues" and just tell people to SAY WHAT YOU MEAN and quit being "subtle", it's IRRITATING.
Famous, successful people in the past (and presently) are likely to have been "diagnosed" with such things, and yet THOSE CHARACTERISTICS made them HIGHLY SUCCESSFUL. Thomas Edison is possibly one of those people. And maybe Einstein. And maybe Bill Gates.
Yeah, I just had to say it. Those of us with non-linear creative minds are often considered "eccentric" (like being called 'geeks') and yet WE are the truly BRILLIANT people who invent the new, shiny that everybody craves. [most El Reg readers probably fall into this classification]
"mortals" giving labels of 'psychological disorders' to brilliant-minded people simply because they don't give a flying fornicate about certain "social rules" that are unimportant anyway. Yeah.
"A potential sentence of 99 years for this offence is grossly disproportionate and therefore unjust"
it's easy to play amateur judge, jury, attorney in a case for which there doesn't seem to be a whole lot of detailed information as to what, why, and the nature of alleged damages done.
If I break into a computer 100 times, and it's a 1 year sentence each time, wouldn't that mean a 100 year sentence? Just pointing that out...
But if he's found guilty, and the sentence is too long, he should definitely appeal it. There are probably more than enough uber-liberal appellate judges (especially in New York and California) who'd feel sorry for him or something, maybe shed a few tears on the bench, and reduce the sentence on principal.
I actually agree with some of the things Pai is talking about, aka the biased filtering and handling of "certain topics" and "certain political ads" by content providers. The examples he provides are just 'one of many' as I understand it, and NOT "straw men".
Pai's position is generally consistent iwth mine, DE-regulating at the FCC. The fact that the FCC should not have the *kinds* of jurisdictional powers that are covered by the misnomer of "net neutrality" is a part of this.
For things like 'paid packet prioritization', I think packet prioritization SHOULD happen. I also think that it should be limited, so that it doesn't adversely affect NORMAL traffic. Maybe the FCC can regulate the portion of traffic that can be prioritized [that would be reasonable] so as to prevent normal service from being pre-empted. But outright BANNING it?
There are already "multiple levels" of service, and you typically pay MORE for the better service. Competition makes this happen. Prioritization (or lack of it) could easily become a competition issue, and not something for governments to control wtih a heavy hand.
I still think that much of this argument started with the torrent downloaders of pirated content... and their allegations that ISPs were filtering and/or throttling the torrent uploads.
"they genuinely are knuckle-draggers. Thick, backwards and bigoted."
As compared to many people on the LEFT, who are genuinely CONTROL FREAKS, SNOBS, and ARROGANT, that are COMPELLED to CONTROL OTHERS through governments and "howler monkey" Saul Alinsky style intimidation, because you ARROGANTLY *FEEL* that you are SUPERIOR to everyone else, who must COMPLY to your "feely" whims like a bunch of BORG (or else they're "knuckle-draggers").
Brainwashed, indoctrinated, FOOLS! Or, in other words, COMMUNISTS.
(there, I said it. happy?)
"From all those disappointed Trump-voters..."
not NEARLY as many as the number of REAL positives for Bernie voters who were screwed over by their own party (and especially Mrs. Clinton).
yeah you just had to go and try to slam on Trump, didn't you? (troll icon observed) [I'm a VERY satistfied Trump voter, thank-you-very-much, who's INFINITELY DIS-SATISFIED with what Con-Grab and "the Establishment" are doing, resisting the Trump plan, but i digress...]
but if the Faece-Bitch weenies are REALLY trying to manipulate people (and I'm sure they ARE), they'd generate 'False Positives' on those who ARE satisfied Trump voters that RABIDLY COMPLAIN about Con-Grab and "The Establishment", because people of "the left" don't "get it", not at all.
And I'd really hate to be repeatedly "911"d by a bunch of leftie-anti-suicide-bots. Or worse, SWAT'ted.
"They suck money out of the world economy."
GUMMINTS suck money out of the world economy (and spend the money UN-wisely, or to gain more power for the politicians).
Google seems to be doing well because at least SOME people are willing to pay for their 'pay for' services. And they hire a lot of people with the money they earn. THAT is a VERY good thing. No 'money sucking' there. It's all good.
There is SO much anti-capitalist sentiment these days... damn COMMUNISTS! "Class Envy" ruins everything. [instead, work your ASS off and BE "the rich guy", or at least learn along the way JUST HOW MANY OBSTACLES that gummints and class-enviers have put in your way of BECOMING rich!]
Try living in a world where you NEVER GET TO KEEP PROFITS or are NEVER REWARDED for working hard or investing wisely. I'd throw up my hands and ask "Who is John Galt?"
And if a company like Google becomes successful, the ENVIOUS and COMMUNISTS come out of the shadows and point fingers at them for being a target, and want them stopped simply for being successful.
(granted I don't want them TRACKING ME so I use 'Duck Duck Go' for search, and NEVER log in for youtube, but they DO have a lot of useful services I make use of, from Android dev tools to API keys and "google maps" when I want to find something - but I use a 'special' browser that deletes history/cookies whenever I do that, and avoid logging in).
"In fairness, what is there positive to report?"
1. Android dev tools are a free download
2. LOTS of free documentation and support for Android dev tools
3. Getting a 'google API' key is essentially FREE [except in high volume API usage cases, like maps]
4. Android STILL lets you set up a phone to install applications "not from the store"
5. Search engine has "privacy mode" if you want it.
6. google drive/docs gives you free storage and (user-based) file sharing for limited online storage that's a fairly large capacity (last I checked). businesses can pay extra for business-related cloud storage stuff.
7. You don't have to log in in order to use the more popular "things"
8. Google maps, also free to use. Embedding them is also free, for doing development or for 'small bandwidth' sites (needs an API key).
The only "bad" they seem to do is tracking you personally, based on your search patterns (if you tell them it's ok, that is), and possibly hoovering up your e-mail and documents stored on their servers [but if you encrypted everything, it wouldn't matter]. Pretty much everything else is fine with me.
I find that Google's privacy policy is moderately acceptable, in that I can tell them NOT to track. But I _still_ use 'Duck Duck Go' for searching.
As for Faece-Bitch they can just shrivel up and die a horrible death, as far as I'm concerned. They completely malfunction with 'NoScript' running. Laughable.
"But I think breaking it up or, ideally, getting rid of faecebook would be the best approach."
why must a heavy-handed GUMMINT-style "solution" be set against Google and Face-bitch, just because a lot of us do not LIKE them ???
Seriously, if they're NOT engaging in any kind of "unfair business practices", but instead are just providing "a service" for free or for money, and anyone ELSE could come along and do what they do without being interfered with, then WHERE is the problem that requires A GUMMINT to "break up the duopoly" ???
Now, if they ARE engaging in anti-competitive "unfair business practices", then they deserve whatever legal remedies are inflicted upon them. Otherwise, they should be LEFT ALONE.
"there's currently no efficient way of making renewable jet fuels in volume"
true. synthetic oil can be made from organic garbage, but I think it would cost 2 to 3 times as much as drilling for it (currently) costs. Eventually this will be the ONLY option, but I don't see THAT happening within the next 100 years...
and by then, I'd hope we would have fusion reactors small enough to fit on a plane.
well, as I understand things, you'd need a "jet engine sized" generator to power electric jet engines, so I'd expect it adds weight to the plane.
If, on the other hand, the engines are lightweight enough to allow OTHER materials to be lighter (such as the engine support brackets), it might be "a wash". But probably not.
Until we've got small nuclear reactors that are capable of making the electricity to efficiently propel the plane through the air, I expect that pure mechanical systems (like turbofans) are better than hybrid electrical ones.
"by using selective throttling."
NO! NO! NO! NO! NO!!!!
*PROVE* that "they" ARE doing this (selective throttling), HAVE done this in the past, and WILL do it in the future, before you invoke CONSUMER-EXPENSIVE REGULATIONS to STOP something that is NOT happening!!!
PROVE IT FIRST! Because _nobody_ wants THAT, naturally, because "throttling" just SOUNDS bad.
and are we sure it wasn't the TORRENT [ab]users that created this kind of FUD in the first place?
"The less government is involved with something, the more innovation and lower the cost it is due to choice. The more they are involved the beyond what is absolutely necessary, just costs us all money."
RIGHT! ON!!!
Now, here's something I just thought of: was this whole "net neutrality" thing thought up because ISPs were allegedly THROTTLING TORRENT TRAFFIC? So the "copyrighted media ripoff" crowd might have ACTUALLY BEEN BEHIND IT? (just pointing it out)
"throttling back some services in favour of others"
I doubt that actually happens, "throttling back".
FYI traffic prioritization would happen at the routers, anyway. PAID traffic prioritization would help pay for BETTER routers (and faster wires between them). Is it such a BAD thing? In other words, it's another example of a rising tide "lifting all boats". THAT as opposed to the "create a FREAKING DAM and then TAX people to PAY for it" approach.
keep in mind that if you reach into the back pocket of some cable company executive and plan on taking that money and doing "something else" with it, that cable company exec will pass the cost along to THE CONSUMER. EVERY TIME. So 'class envy' will never work. Just let them make money by PROVIDING SERVICES that people WANT [and the quality to go with it]. Just keep them from engaging in 'unfair business practices' (like forcing Netflix to pay more because otherwise they'd "throttle Netflix", for example).
Then we'll all be better off with LESS REGULATION.
"net neutrality" is such a MISNOMER anyway, like the way "Fairness Doctrine" was. GUMMINT chooses these names the way "the left" tosses around EMOTION BOMBS when they want something.
And if regulations go UP, "who benefits" ?
POLITICIANS AND GUMMINT BUREAUCRATS. And people who have THEM "in their back pocket".
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
