Re: Over a barrel. ¿lots more security patches for RHEL?
"They were ALL in the Red Hat Linux distribution,"
So we can therefore blame Flash and Java vulns in Windows on MS ? Is that what you are really saying ?
2470 posts • joined 24 Mar 2010
"They were ALL in the Red Hat Linux distribution,"
So we can therefore blame Flash and Java vulns in Windows on MS ? Is that what you are really saying ?
"Most I know just use it for webservers that no one cares much about"
Like Google, perhaps ? or maybe Amazon - anyone like to add a few more 'cottage industries' ?
"of what relevance whatsoever are the number of advisories? "
Simple AC, once you dig into the details they show that of the ~2000 'vulns' reported in RHEL almost all were in 3rd party software and only one hasn't been fixed. Whereas the 684 Server 2003 vulns where almost all MS code and 22 still haven't been fixed.
The fact that you used the link to Secunia to shoot yourself in the foot, as usual, is par for the course
"If you want to see the long term future of Windows, then look at DEC VMS"
I agree with almost everything you say but to equate Windows with one of the most robust OSs - NO !
"Vulnerability Report: Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server 5"
Affected By 204 Secunia advisories 2307 Vulnerabilities
Indeed for 2014 (for example) there were (from your ref) 29 'adv - all in Flash & Java
Indeed for 2013 (for example) there were (from your ref) 35 'adv' - all in Flash & Java & Acrobat
Indeed for 2012 (for example) there were (from your ref) 24 'adv' - all in Flash & Java
Indeed for 2011 (for example) there were (from your ref) 25 adv' - all in Flash & Java
Indeed for 2010 (for example) there were (from your ref) 29 'adv' - all in Flash & Java
Indeed for 2009 (for example) there were (from your ref) 26 'adv' - all in Flash & Java & SAMBA !!
Indeed for 2008 (for example) there were (from your ref) 25 'adv' - all in Flash & Java
Indeed for 2007 (for example) there were (from your ref) 7 'adv' - all in Flash & Java & elinks ?
None between 2003-2007. I unfixed vuln. for RealPlayer (giggle)
Shabby, shabby ....
Whereas the 400-odd MS 2003 server advisories are almost all MS code related and 22 are not yet fixed.
"we don't want the page to be sucked into it"
There used to be "The Journal of Irreproducible Results" which had that title on the front cover tailing-off into a waste-bin
No, but I do know someone ( in fact i chaired the inquiry) who had an explosion where a glass thermometer was ejected with such force that a remenant punched through a glass window 20 feet away just missing the 'owner' of the explosion.
"Evidence shows, however, that CO2 does create an immediate threat to life at a concentration of only 15% in air due to the toxicological impact it has on the body when inhaled at this concentration"
"Depending on the CO2 concentration inhaled and exposure duration, toxicological symptoms in humans range from headaches (in the order of 3% for 1 hour), increased respiratory and heart rate, dizziness, muscle twitching, confusion, unconsciousness, coma and death (in the order of >15% for 1 minute)."
"Good thing you pointed it out - at least now I know why the OP is horribly wrong"
It was a wry comment. Unfortunately if one had to point out to a lot of posters ( who feel the need to comment on something they obviously know nothing about regardless of the fact that they could find out easily enough ) the error in their suppositions then one would be at it rather a lot.
"explode if thrown too hard onto the back of a chair."
Well I carry a scar on my thumb from a flying bit of glass from an explosion ( it was ricochet that bounced around the safety-screen and went through a thick glove) Scary thing was it was only about 5 g of material that exploded. Will that do ?
CO3(2-) + H20 +CO2 -> 2HCO3-
It's an easily reversible process and it's why carbonate rock dissolves in rainwater
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbonate for info.
"chemistry is not my strong suit "
I'm afraid it isn't !
"the spokesman is a chemist, so probably doesn't do much baking. Or washing""
Well I am a chemist, I had a shower this evening and then baked bread ( wholemeal + brown Country Grain) but I do agree the standards have slipped
"I'm looking for in new hardware reviews (particularly for laptops) is whether, and how easily, Linux can be installed."
FYI I bought a 4-core i7, 8GB, 500GB HD, 1920*1080 screen (15inch) laptop about a year ago from PC Specialists WIndows-free and OpenSuse 13.1 installed without a problem. It's just Intel graphics but it will run 2 simultaneous 1080/50p videos using ~18% CPU so I've not found that a problem. Only complaint so far is the rather cheap case. Screen is gorgeous. All the hardware is recognised and works. Sleep works fine and I only shut it down when travelling a distance.
"And btw, Darktable is awesome."
Indeed it is
"The Saturn V (or 5 if you prefer) first stage had 7,600,000 lb thrust..."
Which was more than a million times my (rather wimpy) motorbike at the time (sigh) Even my Velocette Thruxton was only 1/300000th a SatV
"regular people still prefer to spend money on Windows."
Regular people don't as a rule have much choice in the matter
"What? The Sirius Cybernetics Corporation uses Linux?"
I think it's a fairly open secret in HHGG who Douglas thinks of as "The Sirius Cybernetic....."
"Math fail "
I too thought that but an AC above has actually been downvoted for spotting the same thing. Downvoted for an arithmetically accurate statement - what next ?
"While this new novel substance seems safe to mammallian cells, human tests are still some time off. "
I wish them all well and there seems to be a lot of scope in this new area BUT most candidate drugs fail in this part of the of development phases so it's not a given yet esp. if the class turns out to have any generic toxicity which can't be worked around.
"What would be amusing is if the residents then get wind of this name calling, take offence, and launch an attack...."
The whole fleet will probably be swallowed by a small dog
- thanks Douglas
"I still have my Dragon32 from that era."
I also had one of those Vic - don't have it now but the 6809 FORTH thst I got for it still runs on a home-made 6809 system.
(When I assembled the UK101 it didn't work - a bit of probing with a xtal earpiece established that a cheap 7400 TTL chip was faulty - phew. ~£50 was a lot of money in those days)
"M$ did make a decent "ROMable" OS back in the 80s"
Well I had (~1980) a UK101 built from a kit with a 6502 MS ROM Basic and it had a wretched bug in its garbage collector that made any kind of complex string manipulation useless.
THHGG states that it is "Space Aliens" , especially near Heathrow, so who are we to argue
"even if the six Linux users worldwide installed it"
Odd then that Firefox & Chrome ( and a number of others ) all come in native Linux versions. They must know something you don't.
"A small internal combustion engine, sized for the cruise regime, can be quite efficient,"
Indeed in most petrol/hybrid cars a modified Atkinson cycle engine is used that has a higher fuel efficiency than normal (Otto) engines at the expense of lower output for a given engine size. The battery then provides the extra power required for acceleration/hill climb. Regenerative braking is a bonus for urban use or descents.
"virtually nothing comes with it pre-installed"
I'd settle for being able to buy without Windows being installed. Building a new desktop and installing Linux from scratch is easy, but laptops have been a problem. Now there seems a few enlightened smaller suppliers who will provide some quite powerful systems. I'm writing this on one such (4-core i7/8GB/matte HD screen). Case is a bit cheap but the screen is beautiful. OpenSUSE installed and runs a treat.
And that's easily powerful enough to support me logged-in as 3 simultaneous users ( for security reasons) with several VirtualBox VMs running as well as all the browsers/editors/photo processors/video editors/players....etc.
"It does already - millions of TV Box sets, SOHO routers, embedded devices etc."
And, of course, a VAST army of servers Google/Amazon etc. Even Skype
" Plank wavelength of a cat...."
I was always taken with the requirement that to demonstrate any interference in a slit experiment you'd have to have an incoherent cat-beam. Suppose that's easy enough.
Also I guess that a sleeping cat has a zero-point energy that is actually zero
I think it's de Broglie wavelength BTW
"Still waiting for the Amigatards to pipe up.."
Indeed you could but on my A1000 it was a 2-floppy process
"Dunno, but the thought of it is making me want to go learn how to drive a bus"
Perhaps when you grow up
"Raclette is melted-cheese-on-potatoes."
With pickled gurkins & silverskin onions
"And I'm not too sure about how well Mint 'works' on old XP hardware"
Well I've got an old IBM/Lenovo laptop from ~ 2006 with a Celeron M which was donated to me after a Windows XP update borked it and the owner couldn't be bothered to sort it. OpenSUSE installed fine on it and is now on 13.1. Wouldn't ask too much of it as it only has 1GB and a wimpy processor but it's fine for traveling.
The version I'm using reports 0.9.10, but Yast2 reports 0.9.10-16.2 64bit from Packman but I've been using older versions without any stability problems for years now - certainly before OpenSUSE 13.1. In the past there have been times when dragging a clip or rendering would crash so I took to saving ALL the time but not done that for years as I say.
I also had a problem with the program reporting that the rendering had failed but in fact the output was fine. Mind get_iplayer does that for me at the moment too.
"then get Windows and stop trying to pretend that linux is as good."
So in your less-than-humble opinion I should take my 6 Linux computers, install six copies of Windows 8.1 (snigger) and then install all the equivalent programs and for what ? They do all I want now ! I don't recognise your later comment that "They close their eyes to all the hoops they have to jump through to get things to work " Like all software there may be little tricks/snags or bugs but trivial and certainly no worst that comments made here about WIndows programs.
In any case why should you care, what does it matter to you ?
"yay for Darktable, I also like Entangle."
Yes, I use Entangle as well - really good. Darktable took a little getting use to but now I'd be reluctant to use anything else.
Hugin I also like for panoramas.
"Kdenlive is great, but it still crashes too often."
Interesting, I had lots of problems a few years ago but it's been rock solid on the 3 computers I use it on (i7 laptop 8GB, old AMD dual-core 2GB, Intel dual core 2GB) Certainly since I bought my current video camera early 2012 which is 1080p/50 so generates huge clips and rendered files. It took a few months for kdenlive to support 1080p/50. I'm using kdenlive 0.9.10 on OpenSUSE 13.1. What I did find was that all the necessary helper programs needed to be from the same repository
For RAW photo development
Kdenlive for video
"Yes, but by what process? Any chemists care to comment?"
Not my field but I'd venture several processes might be going on depending on the length of time mixed & temperature.
Hydrolysis of some of the esters - not too much I'd guess but it will introduce small amount of acids.
An effect on the palate/taste receptors. 40% alcohol is a pretty wild environment for living cells.
"I know serious athletes that average about that much. Normal people, not so much."
Serious athletes doing the equivalent of a 5 mile walk a day - forgive me if I find that ludicrous. The minimum recommendation for ALL people (in UK) is 2 miles brisk walk or equivalent 5 days a week. If you are desk/car bound then it should be a lot more including moving around every hour if possible even for just a few minutes.
"That's very much true. Moving yourself a mile will consume only about 100 calories. That's the energy of an Apple or 1/3rd of a candy bar. It's much easier to just avoid that candy bar. Cutting out the soda and the snacks is a far more easy and effective option."
It might work if you've a small amount to lose but the fact is that obesity is increasing and most people fail with just dieting - they yo-yo. The point isn't "I'll avoid eating that choc" - it's "I'm massively overweight - what am I going to do now ?"
"I don't think it's nice unsaturated stuff like goose fat, I reckon it's nasty saturated stuff like pork or beef fat...."
You don't need to think here's a measurement - it's quite a mix with lots of variation, but there's quite high levels for both saturated and unsaturated fat.
"Unless you are a serious athlete, you aren't going to exercise enough to lose weight. "
That's not true. It's very hard because it needs commitment.
Consider this : most people gain weight slowly - say 5kg a year, that's ~40000 Cals, and that's just ~110 Cals/day Even a weight gain of ( a huge) 15 kg a year is still equivalent to just 350 calories a day and that's just 1 chocolate bar. Weight gain is pernicious, not sudden. When people do try to seriously do something about it they want instant results hence the fad diets etc. If they try by dieting, unless by serious starvation, to lose weight the weight loss will so slow as to be disheartening given the hunger hence the constant failures.
If you merely diet you have to reduce your intake to 'normal, and that takes time to establish as everyone is different, different outputs, basal rates, environments, biological variation and basic diets. Compounding this is the measurement problem. (Day-day variation in weight can be quite large, even ± 1kg is a range of 16000 Cals, almost entirely water retention/loss but tracking true weight change is made very difficult when you might only be losing 0.05kg/day.)
Once normal ( for you ) calorie intake is known you then have to decide how much to lose and also compensate as you say for the dropping of metabolic rate that accompanies semi-starvation. What that is for any individual ?. If it's say 200 Cals/day (which is a <10% drop in metabolic rate) then that has to be added to the amount you have to diet. If you want to lose 0.7 kg/week (say) that means reducing intake by 1000 Cals/day and that's when it becomes hard. Most people will feel very hungry, cold and depressed. Normal social life becomes hard and any backsliding a cause for guilt. Is it any wonder that most overweight people fail ?.
But remember that weight went on slowly, without most people noticing, it's best removed that way. It does require long-term thinking. But if you've managed to establish a weight neutral diet then even walking 2 miles extra a day will lose you ~9 kg in a year. There are caveats to this, as you lose weight your exercise is less costly in Calorie terms so the loss/mile will gradually slow, you need to be careful about your 'normal' consumption drifting as one choc. bar will negate 2 whole days exercise. The gain is you probably won't feel as hungry as if you'd seriously reduced your calorie intake, you'll get fitter, you'll feel better about yourself, you'll go quite some way to reducing your risk of type 2 diabetes, and if you do this exercise outdoors you'll probably boost your Vit D levels.
Me, I did a lot more than 2 miles a day, I was lucky my job allowed me enough time to do this , running before breakfast, walking instead of lunch, and stomping around the hill in the evenings I did backslide and doing as much exercise in winter where I live was very difficult. But I lost 35kg and never regained it. I still average ~500 Cals/day exercise but my Calories intake has risen to match it.
Footnote : I gained ~25 kg over ~ 5 years when my only exercise was working all hours refurbishing a house that we bought. Lots of isometric exercise but not as much aerobic. Lots of eating of convenience food/beer. I f you remember that equates to just ~100 excess CAls/day
"Argument from fallacy; if your intake was reasonable, you would not need to lose weight."
Of course not. The point is to return to a normal calorie consumption ( for you) that keeps your weight neutral - this isn't dieting it's just returning to normal. At this point you can diet, exercise or both .All will work, the exercise will be hard but you'll be fit and not suffer hunger, & retain/increase muscle.
If you chose diet then you'll be hungry and lose muscle and have lower basal metabolic rate
"Extra exercise accounts for such a small amount of your calorific expenditure" - depends how much you do - when I was losing 35kg I would usually do 800-1800 Cals a day. You can lose 1kg a week or more doing that. It's a lot day-in day-out but it worked (for me)
"Exercise is fine for health, but it will do nothing for weight unless you also constrain intake."
If your intake is reasonable then exercise will reduce your weight, if your intake is enormous so will you be unless your an athlete in training.
"To burn off a pack of chocolate digestives you'd be jogging for 4 hours."
Scarcely a reasonable diet !
"Err.....no. Fats are triglyceride esters of long chain fatty acids. Short chain fatty acids really don't count. You're not going to build up body fat through absorption of acetic / propionic/ valeric / lactic acids (or their salts or esters) - which are what are produced in the rumen."
The three major VFA absorbed from the rumen have somewhat distinctive metabolic fates:"
Acetic acid is utilized minimally in the liver, and is oxidized throughout most of the body to generate ATP. Another important use of acetate is as the major source of acetyl CoA for synthesis of lipids.
Proprionic acid is almost completely removed from portal blood by the liver. Within the liver, proprionate serves as a major substrate for gluconeogenesis, which is absolutely critical to the ruminant because almost no glucose reaches the small intestine for absorption.
Butyric acid, most of which comes out of the rumen as the ketone beta-hydroxybutyric acid, is oxidized in many tissues for energy production.
"Fats are triglyceride esters of long chain fatty acids"
Well oddly enough having been a chemist for 44 years I know that.
Fatty acid synthesis is the creation of fatty acids from acetyl-CoA and malonyl-CoA precursors through action of enzymes......
"Cholesterol in the diet is damned hard to adsorb" Not too hard it seems
"Absorption values ranged widely from 29.0% to 80.1%"
"We do NOT store excess sugars as fat,"
That is simply not true. Glucose is stored as glycogen AND also converted to fat. This is most evident when excess is consumed. The body has a limited capacity for glycogen but as is all too evident an almost unlimited capacity for fat, whether eaten as such or produced from glucose.
There are countless refs. to this : here's one :
"Hepatic and whole-body fat synthesis in humans during carbohydrate overfeeding"
"They do so in their apprenticeship, using their mentor's tools..."
In the absolute everything is made from a chicken or an egg !