Posts by bombastic bob 10841 publicly visible posts • joined 1 May 2015
"The clever sods makes sure you never know when a bloody update will happen, making it FAR harder to do this."
then I connect a network sniffer, watching for "upgrade" net traffic, to something that powers off the box or at least alarms you to go over and pay attention to it...
these things can be defeated. Also may be possible to trigger an update by mucking with the clock
"Linux & BSD have also had their fair share of local exploits."
NONE of which involved *FORCED* *UPDATES* as I recall... and when it happens to Linux or BSD, you get *HEADLINES* like plane crashes vs car crashes... [and Micro-shaft would be the 'car crash' equivalent - ANOTHER vulnerability? Eh, no surprises...]
"Which is the prime reason the updates have to be applied during boot up anyway."
In the POSIX world, a directory entry is simply a pointer to an INODE, which represents "the file". An 'overwrite' of a file that's in-use simply points to a different INODE. Then, subsequent 'opens' of that file use the NEW version (and not the old one). The old inode is kept around on the file system until the last reference to it closes, and then it gets deleted. [this would keep running processes from crashing, for example, if you swapped in a new shared lib before restarting them, and when they re-start, they automatically use the NEW one].
Micro-shaft, on the other hand, ENCOURAGES multiple processes to be able to directly muck with the same file, using a sharing system that MOST LIKELY creates a LOT of inefficiency inside the kernel.
Hence, file I/O on a POSIX system appears to be FASTER than on an equivalent windows system [at least, that's been MY experience].
I sometimes refer to the WORST of this as "paranoid cacheing", i.e. the apparent assumption that "something came along" and changed what was on the hard drive behind your back, and now you have to re-re-read the same block from the physical file, again, even though you just wrote it BACK to the file a few milliseconds ago... [seems to happen most often wirh the registry, most likely due to excessive 'layering' and ".Not"-ishness]
.So, *NOW*, this file-system philosophy of Micro-shaft's is *BITING* *THEM* in the backside, with respect to the hoops they have to jump through when Bitlocker is in use.
/me is now thinking of some terms involving a circle, a cluster, and 'Situation Normal'
systemd free Linux distro Devuan releases second beta
"Not even Mint 18 has been able to undo the suckiness this time."
yeah, coolaid drinking all around it seems.
I had to seriously research *THIS* at one time, and so I'll post it again: How to boot into a CONSOLE instead of a GUI on systemd-controlled systems.
sudo systemctl enable multi-user.target --force
sudo systemctl set-default multi-user.target
*THAT* is important, *ESPECIALLY* for servers. The fact that I had to RESEARCH! THE! HELL! OUT! OF! IT! TO! FIND! OUT! HOW! TO! DO! IT! is a _symptom_ of a BIGGER problem with systemd.
"Never understood the hate for systemd."
a) *FORCING* people to change (apparently for the sake of change)
b) *FORCING* people to adopt a new method that's more complicated than before
c) no clear advantage over "the old method" for most people [particularly embedded]
d) done without asking first [aka 'arrogance and elitism']
systemd is also MONOLITHIC, as opposed to DISTRIBUTED, in the way it works. "all eggs in one basket" isn't good for stability. It's enough that the kernel must be "one basket", but what the kernel does is well-defined and in its own sandbox. Doing that to userland as well (all eggs in one basket) means that some mysterious overcomplicated "master control program" is in charge of the things that run on your computer.
The configuration is also significantly different. Where is "all of that" stored? SystemV-style init could be managed with a very simple text editor.
Additionally, for embedded stuff, you have additional overhead that doesn't exist in sysvinit. It's why I use an older raspian for RPi systems running Linux [*that* and the bluez bugs that haven't been repaired, as far as I can tell, so that when I *need* bluetooth serial to work, the older version is the obvious choice].
"change for the sake of change" causes *EXTRA* *WORK* to be done to ADAPT to that change, and when the change is perceived as UNNECESSARY, the resulting anger and resistance is predictable.
"How is something that is Apache licensed not permissive enough for a BSD core component???"
the general idea is that anything in 'base' is BSD licensed. there are contributed softwares, of course, and it may be possible to extend the licensing around those, but if you NEED it to boot the system, chances are that "no BSD license, no way".
/me has been using FreeBSD since 4.8 [and "stability" is a VERY good thing!]
"I have no science to hand to convince you that vaping is "cleaner" and less unhealthy than smoking"
A study was done a few years ago in Utah. That's right, Utah. A place where tobacco use is about as 'unfriendly' as you can get, except for certain parts of California.
Apparently they used a closed-up room in which they burned cigarettes (artificially 'smoked' I think) and then did the equivalent with a vaping device.
The cigarette-smoke room tested positive for significant levels of various nasty chemicals, including nicotene.
The vape-"smoke" room tested NEGATIVE for "all of that", _INCLUDING_ nicotene.
So it appears that vapes aren't sources for second-hand nicotene, at least not in significant quantities.
I'm allergic to cigarette smoke, or a component of it. Not tobacco, but specifically cigarettes and other things that use "that kind of wrapping" on it. Pipes and cigars don't bug me. Seriously. And I get really *NASTY* headaches if I'm even *NEAR* many people who were smoking a cigarette recently. So no meetings for "at least an hour" with me and 'that person' in the same room, k-thx. However, NO problems with 'vape' smokers that I can tell. Best I can tell, it smells like some kind of sweet perfume or air freshener. No allergic symptoms whatsoever!
If you ask me, it's really a "personal freedom" thing. The only reason I get pissed off by discourteous smokers [who are a small percentage] is that their self-important "rights" interfere with mine, in particular my right to NOT have to be exposed to toxic substances in public places [or at work, or in a store, or in a bar, or in a restaurant, or in a casino even, yotta yotta].
So yeah, vaping is a GREAT idea for people to do something they want WITHOUT burdening the rest of the planet with their exhaust. Not *MY* business what others do when it does NOT affect me.
The ninny-nannies that seek to change people's behavior need to shut the @#$% up and go away. And the discourteous smokers should simply abandon that stupid behavior [it's not helping their cause], obey the laws, etc. and NOT get in people's faces with their exhaust. And people complaining to 'vape' users need to at least look to see if it's a lit cigarette first, before bitching [then, BITCH LOUDLY if it's a lit cancer stick, or shut the HELL up if it's a vape device]. And don't walk up to a smoker just to complain [that's stupid], especially if that person had made reasonable effort to go where nobody else was to light up.
Then we'd all "get along" right?
"went to a user in the goods receiveable department."
even RSA got 'hacked' in a similar way, when an attachment with a payload was apparently opened [in 'virus outbreak' aka MS Outlook] by a low-level accountant that was "on the network".
general e-mail rules to avoid this:
a) *NEVER* preview in HTML
b) *NEVER* even VIEW in HTML
c) *NEVER* allow 'inline whatever' to be previewed (or even VIEWED) in an e-mail
d) *NEVER* click on a link in an e-mail. *NEVER*. [I've received fake 'unsubscribe this' links in legit-looking bulk mail that appears as if I were maliciously subscribed against my will, most recently to 'wired', which I forwarded to their abuse department instead - had I clicked, who knows what would've happened!]
HTML mail is *EVIL* and should be avoided. Doesn't matter how many cat-pic chain mails get forwarded that way. If you must see it, save the attachments, scan them, THEN view them.
This level of security requires strict I.T. policies *AND* compliance. However, if you can actually *GET* users to comply, it will save your ass at some point.
just to point out, since the invention of the PC, where distributed processing is the natural way for things to go, there's still a lot of "big iron" thinking out there, trying to drive computing in the direction of the past [i.e. big supercomputer, lots of dumb clients]. "The Cloud" is one of these trends, and it's not trending so well in my opinion (i.e. "highly overrated").
Sure, there will always be need for centralized data and storage, and even occasional centralized processing, and rent-a-CPU cloud services try to fill that need. However, no data pipe is fat enough to handle what a properly designed, locally run on a multi-core CPU, multi-threaded algorithm can do with summarized/snapshot data in lieu of some monster-server trying to run mega-queries on "all that noisy nonsense".
Hopefully HPE's good ideas will end up on THE DESKTOP COMPUTER, where they belong. Or a game console. Or some other such 'end user device'. That's because the benefits of "Big Iron" just aren't there for the larger segment of the industry.
So if _I_ were HP, I'd focus on leveraging multi-core desktops instead. It will have a bigger and more sustained payoff.
"brains need meat to function correctly."
that's probably true, or at least ingesting cholesterol. [I have this theory about 'low cholesterol' meds and altzheimers...]. cholesterol is necessary for proper nerve/brain function.
In nature, carnivores and omnivores are the ones with the bigger brains, forward-facing eyes, etc. and with the exception of certain veggie-primates [who also eat insects, but that's easily/deliberately overlooked when pointing them out] it's the rule that if you have a big brain and forward-facing eyes, you're either an omnivore or a carnivore.
"Sea cucumbers, sea urchins, jellyfish are also edible and have no CNS."
plants don't have a central nervous system, either. But plants are *ALIVE*. Those vegans are eating "live" food! What hypocrites those vegans are! They should stick to seeds... oh wait, seeds are "plant babies". I guess they'll all have to STARVE now...
if the 5 pound note used PETROLEUM instead of animal fat, would it be "less bio-degradable" ? It's like you can't please one enviro/wacko group without angering the others... [so it's 'greens' vs 'vegans' now - can't do ANYTHING with 'political correctness' in the way!]
best thing to do: tell them ALL to go pleasure themselves, and just ignore their shrill noise. And if they riot, shoot them with beef-fat soaked rubber bullets, and put them in jail for a while without access to their "special dietary requirements". Joke-em if they can't take a @#$%.
why does this *NOT* surprise me???
There's the RIGHT way, the WRONG way, and the MICRO-SHAFT way. Looks like 'Virus Outbreak' uses the 3rd option. no surprise here.
I still haven't seen a REALLY good explanation as to what (exactly) motivates people to use Virus Outbreak (aka MS Outlook). One person replied in another thread, saying how it integrates things like contact info with everything else. I just don't see it, because I'm not a sales/marketing/management/support droid that's on the phone all of the time. In fact, I don't even ANSWER the phone. I turn the ringer off and occasionally check the answering machine. Phones are DISRUPTIONS and my train of thought is too important to be disrupted. So why would I *EVAR* need a 'Virus Outbreak' to 'integrate' all of that? Exactly!
I expect software devs (in general) are more like ME than are like someone who actually USES something "like Virus Outbreak" and so Micro-shaft continues to have their niche that's big enough to keep them viable... with *NO* FOSS devs capable of even SEEING THE NEED for something to REPLACE it.
[those who understand the needs of Virus Outbreak are apparently unable to write a replacement for it; those who ARE capable, do not see nor understand the need.]
"How much sleep do you suppose von Braun lost over this?"
who knows. most likely, very little. There was a LOT of 'ends justifies the means' going on during that war, primarily on the Axis side, but not exclusively.
Aside from that, the fact that a 50 year old rocket is still in use is a really good testament to 'tried and true' designs that aren't continuous moving targets. Such things make it possible to PLAN.
Micro-shaft should take a lesson from this with respect to software development... [I just added "the I.T. angle" to it, heh]
this debate has gone around at the federal level before, and has been summarily REJECTED.
How in the HELL are they going to BILL you on this, anyway?
All you'd need to do is use a PROXY to avoid the damn tax!
What a bunch of MAROONS in Sacramento, anyway. They should stop spending money like it's "other people's money" [whoops, it IS] and buying votes with it so they can retain their power and continue the vicious cycle of tax, spend, tax, spend, tax, spend... [I voted Republican]
"that the magnificent mechanical engineering that was involved in these encryption / decryption strategies"
and yet, those 'precision machines' were generating 'secure' messages that were being cracked, almost 'in real time' [by the end of the war], by skilled crypto experts and primitive computing equipment that was essentially built from spare parts by genius hackers.
obligatory reference to Arthur C. Clarke's "Superiority"
"What makes you think a German with a sense of humour would ever be allowed near a Lorenz machine"
they weren't. Instead, you get humorless people who used common phrases like 'Heil Hitler' at the beginning and/or end of EVERY! STINKING! MESSAGE! which were then used as 'cribbs' to help decode the remainder of the message.
[if they'd started every message with a RANDOM JOKE, this crypt-cracking exploit might not have been possible]
maybe something like this one:
"Wenn ist das Nunstück git und Slotermeyer? Ja! Beiherhund das Oder die Flipperwaldt gersput!"
"Serious efforts by major organisations have clearly shown that with current technology it will remain so."
particularly when "that technology" includes Win-10-nic [spyware], Facebook [tracking you everywhere], and SHA1 [only just now being abandoned].
no WONDER people don't see any real security on "teh intarwebs"...
this in and of itself is an indicator of an even BIGGER problem - emotion-based voting. I often say that I feel with my fingers [fingers turned upward and wiggling, with cupped hands] and think with my BRAIN, because *ANY* decision based on emotion is likely to have a similar result as BEER GOGGLES.
but 'feel' is how people are usually manipulated. it's so easy to stir up emotional unthinking responses.
And yet the Trump phenomenon was NOT emotion-based, for the most part. At least, not from where I saw it.
So the premise that seeing how people FEEL via some kind of twitter-scan-bot is going to reveal election results, they should stop at the emotion part, except perhaps for judging liberals and liberalism, because all *THEY* *DO* is "feel".
Trump's campaign and election was a mass "fed up with it" reaction to politicians in general, who have failed to correctly respond to the electorate on important issues. Brexit is similar, as in when EU fails to properly respond to the UKs needs, you get "that reaction".
Not a lot of FEEL there, except maybe "frustration".
"wishful thinking" indeed.
in the US, polls are often used to MAKE news. questions are asked in leading ways to deliberately skew the results to say what the pollster wants. It has been observed in the past that when you get close to an actual election, the accuracy improves, because the effective use of 'weapons grade' polling "that close" to an election isn't very good, AND the polling companies don't want to make themselves look like COMPLETE fools when their poll results are way way way off (not simply 'way off' or 'barely within the margin of error')
but yeah, I'd say the media and pollsters had a lot of 'wishful thinking' skewing their results towards Mrs. Clinton. No surprise.
The Dilbert author got it right. Interesting.
speed of light in a vacuum is assumed to be a constant. however, our velocity through time would have to be NOT decelerating for that to work... bremstraelung from tachions? interesting thought experiment.
*ahem*
Anyway, light speed in a vacuum is the absolute maximum speed something can go relative to something else. hence relativity.
light can, and does, attempt to go faster than it's supposed to through a medium and creates cerenkov radiation [did I spell that properly] aka "that blue glow" you see in photos of nuclear reactors operating in open pools of water. Those are various particles being forced to move slower because they hit water [and its speed of light is just a bit slower than the particle].
if our velocity through time is NOT a constant, i.e. is slowing down [or maybe speeding up] then light over time wouldn't be going "the same speed" any more. I wonder if THAT is what they're basing their theory on? yeah ok 'velocity' is time-based, so "changing velocity through time" simply means (by my definition) that the time axis isn't change at the same 'rate'. 1 second may not be 1 second a zillion years ago, in other words. If time flowed differently back then, the speed of light would ALSO be different [being based in time]. It would also mess up relativity calculations like E=mc^2 and so mass and/or energy is no longer a constant. damn them!
now I'll want to know where the mass and/or energy WENT to (or CAME from) when it changed over a zillion years' time.
"A big SS shop where I am and I gave it a spin on Ubuntu VM"
I would be interested in seeing how the performance compares. But to be fair, you should test the Ubu VM with a Linux host, and compare against a windows VM on a windows host. And vice versa. Then publish all 4 results. It could be VERY interesting.
"It s**ks as an email server, but the collaboration and integration"
sucks as an e-mail server, yeah. collaboration and integration requires their proprietary APIs to make it work, and that means outlook, and that means *SERIOUS* security problems.
Typical scenario: low-level accountant is e-mailed [spear phished?] a spreadsheet containing a virus of some kind, and it's previewed in 'Virus Outbreak' (aka MS Outlook), and before being deleted, infects the accountant's computer and begins spreading via Exchange...
AFTERTHOUGHT: Maybe the reason why no FOSS applications have this is because of INHERENT INSECURITY? Or maybe the 'niche' filled by Micro-shaft's solution is just something FOSS-makers don't really consider *important* enough to write software for...
ok that last part would be a bit of a marketing fail, as in "failing to see the need" and therefore "failing to fill the void in the market". I personally do *NOT* see the need to have this level of integration. I don't use it, I don't want it, I don't need it. T-bird has a calendar that works for me. Contacts can be maintained in various ways, INCLUDING Google's solution [from what I've seen].
BUT... if someone can JUST explain to me what this "need" is, I bet I could write [read: lead a team of developers doing the actual work] a really good FOSS solution for it, that would beat the pants off of Exchange and Virus Outbreak, run on non-windows platforms, and NOT have serious security problems. It would be worth a kickstarter program, or at least a ".org" web site with a paypal 'donate' button, to get paid developers working on it full-time and put to rest this HIDEOUS "solution" that Micro-shaft excreted nearly 2 decades ago...
and the FOSS solution would be written in C or C++, and *NOT* C-pound, and wouldn't use ".Not". It might even fork T-bird or Evolution on the front-end, and fork back-end systems like Cyrus and sendmail, just to have a nice starting point. It could have perl and/or python support for easy customization, too, and maybe even [gasp] a Java-based (or python-based) UI to configure it. You know, something people would REALLY want, something consultants could wrap their skill sets around, and something that would meet unexpected needs for DECADES without the security nightmare and proprietary nature of Exchange and Outbreak.
[but as for WHY people NEED "those features", I admit, I totally do NOT 'get it']
"So MS needs SQL Server to run on Linux since that is what the majority of Oracle users are using today. The people who are today happily running Postgres/MySQL/MariaDB are probably not the target audience. Neither are existing SQL Server users on Windows."
sounds good to me, except perhaps for the last part, where those considering Linux have to weigh against converting their database to PG or MySQL or Maria, and having SQL Server on Linux would solve that problem "for now".
Now, how can your post be moved closer to the top so that more people will see it?
" I wonder what are the advantages of this over postgresql
SQL Server has generally better performance, far more features, a way better security record, far better tools, and consistent worldwide enterprise class support for a start?"
Uh, are we talking about the *SAME* SQL Server and PostgreSQL here?
/me wonders if that A.C. also pronounces it 'sequel'... (ew) regardless of early IBM market-speak and their inherently confusing nomenclature (i.e. why can't I find 'sequel server' in their list of available products...)
"What is objectionable, apart from the fact that I might just know what I am writing about?"
probably nothing. I get downvoted all the time, usually by howler-monkey types trying to make it *look* like what you say is unpopular or wrong or whatever. I call it "badge of honor" and "being recognized" [and not ignored].
it could be just the usual shills...
"It is recommended to allocate enough space in /opt and in /var/opt prior to installation and database initialization."
What, can't you install it to something *OTHER* than '/opt' depending on the correct hierarchy of the Linux distro you're on? Usually 3rd party stuff (that I use) ends up in '/usr/local' and not '/opt'
'man hier'
then again, I mostly use FreeBSD, and on FreeBSD, '/usr/local' is where just about ALL non-core packages end up being installed.
But then again, a well-written installer SHOULD allow you to at LEAST specify the prefix for the installation path, and follow the rules from that point...
[then again, micro-shaft doesn't even follow their OWN rules, having installed ACTUAL DATABASES into the 'Program Files' tree for SQL Server]
" its the CLR stored procedures that are not. They only arrived in SQL Server 2005."
ugh. ".Not" schtuff doesn't work under Linux. yeah, more reasons *NOT* to use ".Not".
having the rest of stored procedures working would be a benefit for people with legacy database stuff, to port to SQL Server on a Linux hosting server [yeah I guess I already mentioned this, but mentioning again, here, anyway]
sendmail + cyrus works for me. old, tried, reliable, isn't a constantly moving target, and works just fine with T-bird as a mail client. if you need MORE than that, maybe evolution...
I've never figured out why *ANYONE* would *WANT* Exchange, considering how many viruses I've seen passed by it (in the past, homonym-pun deliberate) along with bloatiness and occasional _INCOMPATIBILITY_ with normal IMAP clients (like T-bird).
A 'used to' company I did work for on site had Exchange on a W2k3 server for corporate mail. Yukk. I did all of my work in either FreeBSD or Linux, and refused to use Virus Outbreak [aka MS Outlook] as a mail client. I also wanted to clone my IMAP directories on the Linux and BSD boxen. 'Tedious' was an understatement, until people stopped sending me exchange links [knowing I'd never see the files anyway]. Dual-booting was NOT an option. It required having multiple physical computers, the ones I did work on, and "that windows box" that had the e-mail (and other nonsense) on it.
I forget all of the problems it created for me. Most of them were solved by using ONLY POP MAIL and not receiving any 'exchange links' or calendar nonsense or anything ELSE that required their hideous API to make use of.
anyway, if you don't need a license for a windows server, you'll save money. If some legacy "thing" was written using something SQL-server-proprietary [like stored procedures], which I've blatantly opposed every time I was in the loop on the decision, then you could still save money by running SQL Server on the Linux server, which could (for free) run your DNS, web services, repository, e-mail, document tracker, SAN, etc. and, oh by the way, the database, too.
And the really FUN thing about Linux: if you do a backup using a tarball, restoration onto a DIFFERENT HARD DRIVE is pretty much straightforward. Try that with a windows serer and a non-identical hard drive [so ghost backups aren't a possibility, let's say]. There are just SO many things that are GREATLY simplified when *NOT* using micro-shaft operating systems as the host.
I have to wonder, with all of the malicious uploading going on...
why couldn't Face-*BLANK* just scan the file types and filter things that don't match?
In other words, if it's not a JPEG that 'follows the rules' (no buffer overrun sploits embedded, no ZIP file or embedded HTA or anything else it's not supposed to have), then just REJECT it and say "your file needs to be reformatted" or something.
How hard would THAT be? OK sorry for being intelligent about it, we're talking Face-*BLANK* ...
not hard to do in the POSIX world - just use the 'file' command.
"Guess it's all steel now though."
I would have guessed reinforced concrete, actually, driven in by diesel pile drivers. it's a pretty cool design, actually, a one-cylinder diesel engine in effect, where the weight goes up when it goes 'bang', then comes back down to ignite fuel/air and keep it running. I've seen them going off nearby when I was in the Navy, when they were building an extension to one of the piers. They don't start running properly until there's enough friction to bounce the weight up sufficiently to get that nice steady bang, bang, bang...
"the developers were too cheap to sink the piles all the way down"
considering it's San Francisco, I offer these possible excuses:
a) endangered gophers/moles preventing a proper pile-drive
b) the term 'pile driver' was considered to be an epithet and summarily struck from the list o' instructions for proper building construction
c) too much dope smoked on the job
d) they wanted a NEW tourist attraction: the 'Leaning Tower of Frisco' [note S.F. area residents *HATE* it when you call it 'Frisco']
e) gummint corruption allowed improperly inspected construction
f) it was NOT built by Trump [I had to throw THAT one in there!]
"A brownout in Redmond is mission accomplished."
like what happens when you flush ALL of the toilets at once in a large building. yeah, never done THAT with a coordinated effort (in high school) with walkie talkies [or cell phones on a conference call], right?
just avoid the bottom floor [or two] unless you're wearing waterproof clothing. Sorta re-defines the term "brownout" doesn't it?
"Can windows 10 Home join a domian? Isn't that for Pro and above?"
you've already "joined a domain" with that micro-shaft 'cloud' logon [and its HORRIBLE EULA] using your REAL e-mail address, visible to anyone staring over your shoulder during the login. 'Got spam' ?
oh, that's not good enough? pay more money for 'Pro and above'.
"the other wins because of an archaic counting system."
keep in mind, the electoral college *IS* the system for getting elected. Had it not been there, Trump would have modified his strategy and campaigned in places like San Francisco and L.A. [and quite possibly would have WON California]. Trump did NOT campaign here after the primary. he basically resigned it to Mrs. Clinton, focusing instead on states that made a difference. It's how all U.S. presidential campaigns are won, actually.
The purpose of the electoral college is, in many ways, to prevent "big city voters" from having way too much clout. As a result, presidents must campaign in places like Nebraska and Wyoming and Oklahoma, instead of focusing on Detroit, Chicago, NYC, Boston, San Francisco, and L.A.. It's a better representation of "the entire country" with the electoral college. Not 'archaic' at all. It's well-tested.
"Good luck with your complete-outsider, anti-establishment, old-white-billionaire."
Thanks. Wait a year, then see why we're "right". Results will speak for themselves.
As for the allegations that hacking the votes caused Trump to win, it's only because the usual hacking by Demo-rats [from voter manipulation, october surprises, media bias, and unauthorized voting practices when nobody's paying enough attention] did *NOT* work. It suggests that the percentage of people actually FOR Trump was probably a LOT higher than reported, even at the polls...
"each audio channel is actually 'general purpose' in its design with output and input amplifiers."
no good deed (totally programmable audio channels) goes unpunished [being used for exploits]
BOM cost just went up by a dollar, to add a couple of power amps between audio chip and speakers/headphones, to stop this.
"UK electric drive warships have had their share of problems, and the same is true of just about anything cutting edge and clever, civil or military."
this has been tried before:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Tullibee_%28SSN-597%29
My nuclear prototype was the S1C in Connecticut, _the_ prototype for the power plant on the U.S.S. Tullibee. So I'm kinda familiar with problems associated with this design, and how it compared to, let's say, an L.A. class sub in the 80's. But the thing was built, and might as well get used for SOMETHING. Note that it suffered a broken shaft at least once, and had to be towed. Oops.
Electric *CAN* be quieter. It also limits your propulsion speed (among other things). Apparently, in THIS case, it can't tolerate shaft seal leakage very well (that's mostly me speculating).
OK has NOBODY designing this thing ever heard of BATTLE DAMAGE??? You get a torpedo shoved up your backside (hint: acoustic homing torpedos going for the noise) and the shaft seals will more than just LEAK or seize up. If you don't simply get a catastrophic hull breach, the back end of your propulsion system is likely to be FLOODED and maybe one shaft still works, but it's better than 'dead in the water'.
A good steam turbine design (with reduction gears) will STILL WORK in flooding conditions, at least for a while, possibly long enough to abandon ship or NOT get hit AGAIN by another missile or torpedo... [or launch a counterstrike, or whatever].
Also reminds me of M-16's that didn't ship with a cleaning kit, because "they did not need it". Then in battle conditions, they misfired and had other problems. Issue cleaning kits, MOST problems solved. And so on.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
