>> "A qwerty phone? really? Who uses this stuff?"
Me if blackberry made anything affordable.
1555 posts • joined 29 Sep 2006
>> "A qwerty phone? really? Who uses this stuff?"
Me if blackberry made anything affordable.
>>considering it was entirely artificial and concocted by the latter as nothing more than a cynical spoiler motivated by greed.
Well so far most commercial CA's have enjoyed a free money-printing machine, they weren't going to take this lightly.
I have been using my own CA for ~15 years now, "as I trust myself", never gave a penny to the likes of Comodo, Verisign, Symantec et all.
I'm really glad about the whole let's encrypt enterprise, the entire commercial CA model is a scam of planetary proportions.
Thus ensuring software does all the thinking and relegating a human being to be more than an autonomous body for the software.
And they say mobiles are bad for your brains...
Essentially relegated to the status of glorified micro-controller that doesn't run as hot as a x86, because exotic things can't match the rhythm of the x86 industry.
Eventually if ARM is not stupid and keeps up they will erode into the PowerPC niche of moderately powerful CPU that doesn't get too hot.
This is an old story.
Always used them to make notes about erratas:
Page 35 where it says "rsync -aviw ...." they mean "rsync -aviW..."
And so on, in the book where the fault is found I write an asterisk + E next to the piece "*E"
>>YOU STILL HAVE TO HAVE ANALOGUE TO DRIVE THE EARPHONE COILS!
>>This is daft. The only advantage whatsoever of ditching an analogue jack is to Apple.
Spot on, this only benefits Apple, now if you want to produce iPhorno headphones you need to cash Apple a license.
And I'm waiting to hear people that the last security update for iOS has killed their unlicensed headphones.
But, who cares, whoever buys Apple stuff deserves the Apple treatment.
>>>Costs. pure and simple. Mechanical trays cost money and are a PITA when it comes to reliability.
This, this here, one of the most moronic arguments ever.
Samsung saving .50p on a mechanical connector saves nothing to you or to Samsung.
Shall I remind you that you are who pays for the phone?
This is the same logic that drive moronic decisions at companies, my favorite is the moron at Commodore who removed one serial line from the motherboard of the C64 to save a few pennies, destroying the speed of the serial bus in the process.
And so on.
The customer pays for the product, and no one buys a product >100 pounds because it is .50p cheaper!
Couldn't have happened to a nicer company (Facebook)
I laughed when I saw the tip falling down and exploding on a second explosion.
And I laughed because all these things represent is money and not loss of life, so yes, it is the moral thing to laugh.
The payload was a satellite for Farcebook to bring internet to remote regions of Africa, the same regions where people does not have electricity much less a computer, and smartphones are used as torches to illuminate the hut at night, so yeah liberal progressive logic blew with the rocket, hence why I'm enjoying myself.
If anything I'm sorry for Musk and not "Farceberg", I'm a fan of Space X and I wish they produce the best space rockets ever.
""and warning Ireland that the EU was seeking to expand its powers over national governments.""
""Cook comes across as much as a politician would""
True as well, see: http://fortune.com/2016/08/24/apple-tim-cook-fundraiser-clinton/
It is all politics; from my point of view: fcuk Apple and fcuk the EU.
>> "the ability to just dump containerised applications on top of he hypervisor"
You mean the OS.
Containers fit very well with the workload of I have an unattended compiler server-chain that produces a bottled application+filesystem at the other end each time anyone makes a commit to git.
Anything outside that model and containers quickly become a chore.
Sure, you can replace a container with another when upgrading and that is nice, troubleshooting the containers, making non-trivial changes to the container, changing the compiler chain... that's another story, and it is the same with any complex system.
But this proves that there are two standards, one for us and another for the very rich who can afford these tricks, then they use the profits to rig the game even more in their favour by buying themselves political favours (H-1B visas, shhhhhh)
"And fuck you common people, we know better than you, we're royalty".
"virtualisation isn't a growth business any more and is gently slowing vSphere development"
One wonders if the real reason has more to do with not much to copy-paste over from kernel.org these days, currently kernel.org is not undergoing any significant architecture changes and they are embarked in a "just refining stuff" phase for the time being.
But that is just me :-P
>> Otherwise folks, use at your own risk with wearing a full Hazmat suit and a 40ft barge pole.
No one other than testimonials will use PowerMeh! in Linux because there is no god-damn point to it in the first place!
This is like trying to come out with a device for voice communication over wires with a limit of 100m and call it "talkphone" when the world already has "telephones" that go over any distance and can even be wireless.
No, and a thousand times NO!
In a Unix box (not just Linux) the distinction between the shell and the utilities is: NONE. (The system's design makes automation-shell functionality an inherent quality of the OS)
The integration is provided by the environment itself, there is no requirement for a program to do anything to be integrated in the shell, and the shell doesn't need to do anything special to interact with a program and automate things.
To achieve object-level functionality as you do in PowerMeh! all that is required is to have something in the environment that the shell can use and there you go.
We call that Perl/PHP/Python.
I haven't bothered to check PowerMeh! for Linux, but if MS have done things correctly in the Unix style I should be able to leverage PowerMeh! and .net scripting from bash or ksh without having to do anything special.
However I seriously doubt that a lot (Microsoft doing things correctly) every piece of Unix related stuff that I have seen from Microsoft was a pile of crap.
It is not even that, PowerShell solved (more or less badly and for the second time [wscript anyone]) an issue that existed in the Windows side of things.
PowerShell does not solve any problem in Linux, this is not a question of PowerShell being better or worse, PowerShell does not provide anything on Linux that's not there already in a better more refined fashion.
You sir won the interwebs today, have a pint on my behalf!
>>> When Powershell first emerged in Exchange 2007, I didn't like it. It was new, it was wordy, it was different. Why do I need to learn something new? Then I started to use it more and began to realise how powerful it is.
Are you for real? are you serious?
Of course powershell is da bomb in Windows, its fossil terminal and batch prior to powershell were utter crap.
>>I supported Hyper-V at my last job and personally watched the cluster fail about 2-3 times per month, usually caused by running updates.
I used to work on a very large Hyper-V cluster which used to have all sort of failures several times per week, usually caused by god knows what...
One of the worst experiences ever with a software product, even the Windows guys were left scarred.
>> So this is actually rational. Amazing as that is. This allows people to run MS stuff on top of a real operating system.
Like... what, what exactly?
>>>Shame that us mere plebs (who can't legally buy enterprise edition) can't stop W10 patches from being rolled out and crapping all over your system.
If only... there was... another...
On an imaginary version of Windows this object-oriented interface is robust and works well, but in the best version of Windows yet, this is not the case.
ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha.
You're in for a nasty surprise, what makes you think that it does integrate well in Linux? This was designed in a Microsoft centric way.
To control an application from powershell you require to have an interface with it provided by the company who made the software.
Also, I wonder what type of Linux sysadmin is going to deploy this on a Linux server to do anything just because someone feels comfortable with powershell syntax.
Why, just why?
This is of no use to Windows people, they do not use Linux, this is of no use to Linux people, we already have a number of decent functioning shells that cover many use cases.
We have a number of scripting languages that we can combine flawlessly with these shells.
Why? What problem does this solve?
I'm sure there is a psychopathic reason for all of Microsoft's Linux love and this has a dark purpose.
Was always great, and almost the only product that mattered on the Citrix product porfolio, hence why Citrix neglected it lately (At some point they though on discontinuing it due to MS RemoteApp pressure)
I have fond memories of setting Citrix server farms.
I never understood why Citrix kept changing the name, WinFrame, MetaFrame, Presentation Server, then XenApp.
Funny how over the years everybody kept calling it just Citrix.
I think what MS has done here is to cede Citrix the Remote application side of their Azure operation, in exchange Citrix is to finish the screwing of Xen (the virtual platform)
I foresee that Citrix will get rid of Xen in 3...2...1...
Citrix WinFrame became a thing with NT 3.5.
But obviously stating this does not help the click-fest.
There are already patches proposed in the kernel mailing list.
Bet by tomorrow this is a non-issue.
And it is not a Linux vuln but a protocol flaw.
""Windows 10 to make the Secure Boot alt-OS lock out a reality""
Of course, that was always the plan, surprised? not.
>> ROFL - People are so, how can I say it - hmmm STUPID !!
The entire industry (and IT people) for some reason love to be fcuk ed in the arse and love to deep-throat MS.
To this day for 30 years I have yet to understand why.
Oh well, this is the best windows ever, but the next one will fix everything wrong with the current one.
From Linus mouth:
Guys, this is not a dick-sucking contest.
If you want to parse PE binaries, go right ahead. If Red Hat wants to deep-throat Microsoft, that's *your* issue. That has nothing what-so-ever to do with the kernel I maintain. It's trivial for you guys to have a signing machine that parses the PE binary, verifies the signatures, and signs the resulting keys with your own key. You already wrote the code, for chrissake, it's in that f*cking pull request.
Why should *I* care? Why should the kernel care about some idiotic "we only sign PE binaries" stupidity? We support X.509, which is the standard for signing.
Do this in user land on a trusted machine. There is zero excuse for doing it in the kernel.
Yeah, Brexit is what is killing rackspace's growth.
Sure, because the past 5 years of bad decisions here and there were because of Brexit.
The fact that AWS is built on the money poured on that popular shop, how is it called...amarillo? I don't know.
The whole world seems to react to AWS and MS in this fashion: "Run for the hills!!! they're unstoppable and they will absorb the world".
Except if you're Obama, then things happen because you're lucky.
What has he said that is extreme?
That the USA should pull out of the middle east and stop senseless wars there?
That uncontrolled migration for the sake of cheap salaries should be controlled?
That the corporations are moving American jobs to 3rd world countries, China, Mexico, India?
What? what exactly, I want examples out of the horse's mouth.
Because so far I haven't heard anything that is not within the powers of POTUS.
I'm no fan of Trump (I'm no fan of any politician, they're all crooked aristocracy in my book***) but nothing that the man has said so far is too far from what a silent majority of people think.
I think Trump gets bashed by the MSM relentlessly in stark contrast with the lack of coverage of Clinton's shenanigans. (BBC Propaganda much?)
***If you want further proof check any leaked information about a bunch of politicians, including but not just the DNC leak.
The Democratic party and the Klu Klux Klan:
There fixed it for you.
Cthulhu, a candidate you can trust.
At least you'll be sure of what you'll be getting.
Amazon and Google maybe.
That VMware likes to copy paste from kernel.org.
>> Nobody wants to reboot these machines for updating
Then something is wrong with the whole set-up.
>> If this works, in theory telcos could update switches and routers without rebooting
So we make the switches & routers more expensive with all the extra hardware, while at the same time we do not solve the conundrum that you require two units for resilience.
Which leads me to think that these people who can not restart one of their core/whatever for patching are doing it wrong.
Patching without downtime is a solved problem if you care about it.
Also moving VMs out of a host is something that happens automatically on most decently set-up virtualization farms, and at most a VM loses a couple of network packets.
If my memory serves me right VMware excells at this, the vm is first activated on another host then stop on its current host once it is up and running on the other host.
The only problem that's not solved is when you have dedicated physical hardware for a VM, but no one does that in large scale deployments*, perhaps at home or for testing purposes.
Containers... we'll talk about it another day, and trust me the problem is not the OS the containers run on.
I guess VMware can do something clever with this, but I fail to see the "redefining future of IT" here.
* People who get upset by generalizations usually have low IQ.
"Marissa Mayer, who was hired to turn Yahoo around, has just sold Yahoo's assets in a fire sale for $4.8 billion dollars to Verizon, a mockery of a company which once had a valuation of $140 billion dollars. But we've also just learned that for her expertise Mayer will be collectively paid about $220 million for her efforts in the past four years. That's about 5% of the value of Yahoo!"
Thought I should mention...
But he never left.
MS Still operates the same its always been.
Expect double down on the MS store and locking down of the Windows platform.
Have never had to set-up IPV6 infrastructure from scratch, or have to administer any large IPv6 network.
It is an abomination.
Complexity... it is all complexity isn't? always the bloody complexity.
Who's there knocking at the door? it's complexity.
You can't kill complexity, nor reduce it significantly beyond a certain scope.
The only silver bullet for complexity is: PEOPLE.
People that can deal with it that is.
My laugh was completely stateful.
I would not go with a very large company unless they have something I strictly require.
There are plenty of competent small-medium sized ISPs in the UK.
Just my 2 pence.
>> That's why people worry about the bad guys making dirty bombs
They worry because they do not understand how it works or how pointless the endeavour is.
Say make a dirty bomb out of cyanide, lead, mercury, botulinum, I would be more scared about that than some low grade radioactive actinides.
At most a "radioactive" dirty bomb would cause about the same body-count as a regular bomb because of the conventional explosive, it will contaminate a reduced area, and will be easy to clean (I say easy, not cheap) because the radioactive particles are... well... easy to detect. Some people may die months or years later due to the exposure, but it will not be for example 9/11 levels of damage by a long long shot.
Too much effort for the same reward as a conventional bomb.
Cut one head and two will take its place...
Hail hidr... torrents!
>> Problem is Big Content has the stupid on their side.
I do agree with you, but the stupid watch less and less new content because they have realised it is all garbage lately.
>>> Fixed that for you.
Leftist snowflake types always project upon others the qualities and attitudes they most despise without looking at a mirror first, or have any form of introspection.
Grow up and present convincing arguments like an adult.
>>BT's spokesperson told us: “We are disappointed to be criticised for having invested more than £1bn a year in infrastructure when the UK was emerging from recession and rival companies invested little.
I am disappointed with BT because:
* They force expensive line rentals. (Which they hike up every now and then)
* When they made fibre available in my neighborhood they only made available 20 fibre connections for 100 states.
* They are lowering everybody's upstream unless you go for a more expensive package.