Re: I have an idea
3265 posts • joined 19 May 2010
"I think it is nuts for a small country to try to have a big naval force"
We're a small country who has one of the longest coastlines in europe. You need a large navy to defend it.
We're also a country which now relies almost entirely on foreign imports for most of our raw materials and consumer goods, most of which come by sea. We therefore need to be able to protect our supply lines, should it ever become necessary.
I'm sure I read a recent story on here about certain models of ZyXel being wide open to attacks due to an internet facing open management port which was meant to be locked down to certain IPs, but was left open to everyone and his dog.
I thought it was Talk-Talk, but apparently not, I can't find the story now.
Could well be the same problem though.
what's the point of having a stealth warship
It's not to try and hide it, so much as to make it harder to hit with a missile.
The days of warships firing dumb shells at each other are long gone, and so the majority of anti-ship ordnance is missiles nowadays, either ship-launched or air-launched.
Giving your warship a low-return radar signature means that potential attackers have to get closer before they can successfully lock on, and if combined with a reduced heat signature to fool IR targeted missiles can help protect the ship from attack and bring attackers in range of the offensive armament.
As I posted on the previous story about this, I was able to make Thunderbird work with my Hotmail account by setting up an alias on the account using the outlook.com domain, and logging in with that email address.
The error thrown when trying to connect to my hotmail.co.uk account was Error="AuthFailed:LogonDenied-FederatedStsUnreachable
which suggests that the Federated Trust between the outlook.com domain and other domains like hotmail.co.uk had failed.
Our comms room at the office - it's not big enough to grace with the term "Server room" - was carefully planned by us IT staff when we moved buildings 6 years ago. We were given free reign to design the best possible space, as we were starting with a new build.
It had three 42U racks full of servers, and a fourth 42U cab which held the switches, patch panels and routers which sat in the middle of the room with free access all round.
It had nice open worktop areas round two sides, with loads of power and network outlets, and plenty of storage space for cables, components, etc, etc.
It is currently full to bursting with assorted crap, including old office chairs, 4 car tyres, a pile of ceased network switches and routers from a branch office which closed, 2 large-screen TVs, and the bicycle, and full golf-trolley, belonging to one of the Directors.
We can't actually open the doors to the racks without moving stuff out of the room.
Oh, forgot to say, access is controlled by physical locks and electronic passkeys, only the IT team and Directors have access. Guess where most of the junk comes from...
The error I was getting mentioned something to do with Federated Trust issues.
The exact error was:
when trying to log in to POP using a hotmail.co.uk account, which suggests an issue with AD domains and the Trust between them.
As mentioned in the article, I set up an alias on my account using the outlook.com domain, and using that I was able to connect and retrieve mail as normal.
As anyone with a vague interest in SpaceX knows, a rocket blew up on one of their launch pads in September, with no casualties except for the Facebook-owned satellite strapped to the rocket at the time.
How long are El-Reg going to perpetuate this myth?
It was not a Facebook owned satellite, it was a Spacecom owned satellite, built by IAI, and Facebook and EUTelsat had rented bandwidth on it.
What fucked up distro do you use? Does it not have ping or traceroute or ssh installed either?
From my own experience, none of the following have the full set of network tools installed by default:
Redhat, Centos, Ubuntu, Debian (and its offshoots, like Mint).
They do have ping, and ssh, but not traceroute, whois, dig etc.
He rates his branding very highly (the word Trump is apparently supposed to be worth 3bn) and he has a penchant for naming things after himself.
Surely, surely he knows what the word "Trump" is mostly associated with in the UK?
There's no way that he will ever be able to change that.
...and ideally go back to the pre WW II party of less overseas intervention - and allow us to actually balance the budget when we don't waste so much money on defense spending.
I'm afraid that you won't see your wish come true, as I understand it one of Trump's less controversial ideas was that he wanted to increase defense spending.
an obnoxious, bullying ham robot with one too many authoritarian programs installed
Careful, your editorial bias might be showing there... :)
I find it interesting that Donald has consistently maintained that the election is rigged. Should he win, does that mean that the Democrats can legitimately call the result into question, and if so, what could he say?
By contrast there has been no move away from the ageing TLS 1.0 protocol: 96.1 per cent of web servers still support it, compared with 97 per cent in June 2016. Maintaining compliance with the credit card industry’s PCI DSS standard means those who handle credit card data need to drop support for TLS 1.0 from June 2018.
Very few publicly facing web sites will be prepared to remove TLS 1.0 support whilst a substantial number of visits come from client browsers or operating systems which require it.
We investigated it last month, as a PCI audit highlighted that we still supported it on some of our servers, but an analysis of the client's site traffic showed that nearly 30% of visitors still used browsers which required TLS 1.0 to connect.
I can't see any company whose primary income stream is web based cutting off 30% of their customer base just to be PCI compliant.
What has his got to do with anything technolgy related?
Ok, first, it doesn't have to, the article is in Bootnotes.
Second, the story involves Lindsay Lohan, who has a long history of involvement with El Reg's Special Project Bureau (RIP Lester).
Third, it involves turning on Christmas Lights, which is obviously a technical function, and a post on Twitter, which is an IT angle.
So you're saying, instead of relying on the F-35B being VTOL, which means we have S/VTOL only carriers that have to use helicopters for cargo, AWACs etc. we should go back to using the Harrier, which was a S/VTOL aircraft which relied on helicopters for cargo, AWACs etc...
No, I'm saying there are two different issues.
First, that they planned to build the carrier based on using VTOL / STOL aircraft, without considering the requirements for catapults and traps which permit the use of COD and other ancillary aircraft types to support carrier operations.
Second, having designed the carrier with VTOL / STOL in mind, they then sold off or scrapped our only operational aircraft of that type.
Because they don't operate that way. If you want to prove me wrong please identify the countries that operate aircraft carriers that can handle cargo planes and tankers, along with the names of the ships themselves.
The US Navy uses the Grumman Greyhound in the COD (Carrier Onboard Delivery) role, to ferry personnel, mail, supplies, and high-priority cargo from land to aircraft carriers such as USS Nimitz et al. A derivative, the Hawkeye, operates as a carrier based AWACS.
They also use the Lockheed Viking in a number of carrier based roles which include anti-submarine warfare, and in-flight refuelling (tankers).
Er... no. Do a search on "Replenishment at Sea" for some clues about how it is done. For the Royal Navy the role is fulfilled by Royal Fleet Auxiliaries; see the relevant Wikipedia page.
Fleet replenishment by the Royal Fleet Auxiliary is fine for long-term planned logistics, where delivery times are in weeks, but of no use at all for short term requirements where COD is used.
We are rapidly becoming an international laughing stock, aren't we.
We once produced the world's best VTOL / STOL fighter aircraft, but we decided to scrap them all instead of investing in upgrades and improvements. Then we built an aircraft carrier designed to only operate VTOL / STOL aircraft, and we have to beg another country to provide some barely capable aircraft to operate from it.
Even if you plan to only operate VTOL / STOL fighters from a carrier deck, why did no-one realise that the carrier would need to operate cargo aircraft and tankers to support the fighters, and they would need cats and traps to be useful?
As it is, the only way to ship cargo, spares, mail, and crew to the vessel is by helicopter, which limits the range it can operate from land based support.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019