Would you rather get crypto-locked, or a client get crypto-locked?

@mlnews said in Miscellaneous Tech News:

FBI trying again to get encryption circumvented for American citizens.

With this stance, I think any system the FBI purchases or builds themselves needs to have a key escrow system that the american people can use at will whenever they feel the FBI is up to know good.

@scottalanmiller said:

Like everyone rushed to read the site, then were exhausted and took the next hour off?

Just like having the house to your self, busy for 10 minutes and then you nap for an hour...

Bug Description: Browser information is not filtered properly while saving the session values into the database which leads to a Remote Code Execution vulnerability.

Affected Versions: 1.5.0 through 3.4.5

Upgrade to: 3.4.6

https://developer.joomla.org/security-centre/630-20151214-core-remote-code-execution-vulnerability.html

It's just a matter of time until every other country in the world has fully auto vehicles of all kinds, and the US is till debating tail-light law for human driven vehicles. . .

@RojoLoco One that ask if you're certain you want to uninstall the program, and then opens a website in IE, requesting you to fill out a survey about why you're uninstalling the software....

I'd look at something like these, they work quite well.

When I was at a sheet metal company we had to buy several, they were killing computers left and right.

Just make sure to clean out the air filters regularly (monthly)

More importantly it would seem the FCC wants ISPs to use equipment which is known to have security flaws and or has worked to create backdoors for the 3 letter agencies of the US.

@scottalanmiller said:

minimum a six hour cross country drive!!

Small country.... lol

Well the board is only $136 USD, the processor is over $1000 on newegg..

Which seems a bit insane.

For a home lab at that price you'd be better of buying a server from xbyte and loading it up...

@black3dynamite said in Miscellaneous Tech News:

https://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2018/05/nautilus-remove-ability-launch-binaries-apps

It sounds as if the GNOME devs actually don't want anyone to use their desktop environment. . .

@RojoLoco Now find the machine that the card would go into.

So I'm just performing an update on my xen server and it's taking it's sweet time doing it...

Just figured I'd mention it.

@danp that still counts as broken in my world. If the people developing the software don't understand how to use the tools they need to develop the software. . . well then there is a break there. .

@BRRABill said:

@coliver said:

My wife sent me this picture a few minutes ago. I could have sworn it was still standing before when I left.

Plow?

Those Plow's they get rowdy this time of year, it's almost mating season so they are trying to find a secluded area to bed down for the Spring / Summer months.

So I just had a thought, which is simply when do you trust open source (freeware, community "edition") anything with any portion of your disaster recovery plan in IT(or business in general). For example, I am currently running several VM's at work on a solution that is 100% built on "community edition" software.

Now yes, the base software (Xen Server) is built* and backed Citrix and Community, which is fully open source now. As well is NAUBackup (the current solution I use to create full VM exports weekly). I'm comfortable with this, but when did I (you) become comfortable with it, and why?

When did it become acceptable to trust software that I (you) can't sue someone over if it fails?

Why must we purchase software (or more specifically support for a software solution) when the very same solution is offered for free, as any rational being, I would have to say that giving up something for something offered completely free of charge seems...... insane. I'd take my chances with the free, unsupported option.

I can carry my grocery bags to the car just fine, but if an employee offered to carry them for me at no charge, I'm almost certain I'd take that offer.

If you wanted to give me $100 for the holidays, why would I refuse? Much like the same, why would any business refuse the benefits of free software. Free to develop.Free to F*** ones company over with software. (for less of a better expression). Or specifically choose to pay someone else to manage it / configure it and what have you.

Why must a business or person pay money for support, if support is offered willingly by wonderful communities of people free of charge, when software is developed and improved free of charge, when issues can be troubleshot free of charge? Albeit potentially with a delay.

But on the other hand, there is a very small promise of support in a timely manner. The norm 24x7x4 as warranty terms go, but still, is 4 hours reasonable compared to free (live with it attitude). A 4 hour delay might very well cripple a small company in the worst cases and at the bear minimum inconvenience a large one.

Even with "promises of a timely response" a business might get a response of "Assigned to support engineer 5" and still not hear back from SE5.

Since open source solutions are as capable as they are, why does any business pay for software, when the open source and free to use solutions are often as capable if not as good the paid versions. (lets exclude ESXi because, well come on...)

Sure the entire part of having someone to yell at when things go belly up might be comforting, but the "support team" is no more at fault for the issue(s) you're experiencing as the dog who took a dump in your yard is for having to take a dump. They are simply there at the time.

Does having someone to scream at or make the case seem that much more critical really improve your odds of recovering any more quickly? I'd have to say no, sure it entitles you to an expert for a set amount of time, or number of issues, but that expert likely will think you / your company are a bunch of ____________ (put something in). Now this expert would very unlikely lead you into more trouble unless they really wanted to cause harm, but that aside of community support I've asked for, I've never once been purposefully misguided. Or lead to cause more damage to a system.

Which brings me back to my original question if you effectually could speak to the same experts in an open forum versus a phone call (or even in put) in either case you'd try to be kind, to the point, and express the issue as quickly as possible to find the issue. So why pay for closed source software (or software with support attached, which often is what you're actually paying for). I'd have to correlate it to Insurance, you want it in case something happens, but seldom use it, or seldom get it's value.

Yes the whole "You can't possibly know everything, or every possible configuration, or this will likely suit your needs the best". But again, if you can get the same things for free why pay for it? Strictly speaking in legal terms (US legal for simplicity, I'm not condoning theft etc.)

I'm looking forward to seeing your responses.

PS maybe it's just the wine talking...

@scottalanmiller said in Miscellaneous Tech News:

@jaredbusch said in Miscellaneous Tech News:

@scottalanmiller said in Miscellaneous Tech News:

@fiyafly said in Miscellaneous Tech News:

@dustinb3403 said in Miscellaneous Tech News:

@danp that still counts as broken in my world. If the people developing the software don't understand how to use the tools they need to develop the software. . . well then there is a break there. .

Let this be a lesson to everyone who is writing scripts and programming...
COMMENT YOUR CODE.

Better to just write code that is readable, if you need to comment it, check to see if there isn't a better way.

Readable doens't mean shit. All code is inherently readble because it is a logical process flow.

It might be horribly inefficient, but it is always readable.

Even the cleanest code tells you jack shit about what the though process was for the design. That is what comments are for.

It means a lot. All code tells you what the programmer decided to do, comments to say what they failed to do is a silly thing to have in code.

Readability applies to code just like it applies to English. You can make technically correct English that is hard to read, or easy to read. Same with code. Readability is very real, and standard study material for SD and CS courses. Knuth, the father of CS, was a key advocate and researcher in this area.

But reading something and understanding what the heck is going on are two different things. I know people who have sat down and programmed for hours, and then went and looked at the code and had no idea what they did "or how it works".

Comments are meant to be a simple "this does this" in plain language, not programming language that would require you to look at the entire code to understand what is going on.

@travisdh1 Something I didn't get about this last StarWars movie.... how do they plan to move a planet?

I mean besides the whole "enveloping a sun to destroy a planet", like how the hell do they expect to move the planet afterwards. Or do they just abandon it, and start building a new one?

I've updated the above guide as some things weren't working when I tested the How-To.

sudo -s may be usable, but for simplicity of the guide I've removed it. sudo is required before each command for the purposes of this guide.

Sorry folks.

@scottalanmiller said in Miscellaneous Tech News:

@dustinb3403 said in Miscellaneous Tech News:

@scottalanmiller said in Miscellaneous Tech News:

@jaredbusch said in Miscellaneous Tech News:

@scottalanmiller said in Miscellaneous Tech News:

@fiyafly said in Miscellaneous Tech News:

@dustinb3403 said in Miscellaneous Tech News:

@danp that still counts as broken in my world. If the people developing the software don't understand how to use the tools they need to develop the software. . . well then there is a break there. .

Let this be a lesson to everyone who is writing scripts and programming...
COMMENT YOUR CODE.

Better to just write code that is readable, if you need to comment it, check to see if there isn't a better way.

Readable doens't mean shit. All code is inherently readble because it is a logical process flow.

It might be horribly inefficient, but it is always readable.

Even the cleanest code tells you jack shit about what the though process was for the design. That is what comments are for.

It means a lot. All code tells you what the programmer decided to do, comments to say what they failed to do is a silly thing to have in code.

Readability applies to code just like it applies to English. You can make technically correct English that is hard to read, or easy to read. Same with code. Readability is very real, and standard study material for SD and CS courses. Knuth, the father of CS, was a key advocate and researcher in this area.

But reading something and understanding what the heck is going on are two different things. I know people who have sat down and programmed for hours, and then went and looked at the code and had no idea what they did "or how it works".

Comments are meant to be a simple "this does this" in plain language, not programming language that would require you to look at the entire code to understand what is going on.

Right, so they DIDN'T make it readable, hence the problem. If they had, and knew how to program and weren't just guessing - you still have to be literate, then the comments would have been superfluous. Just because you know people who make unreadable code doesn't mean readable code is the issue, it means they didn't do it and then had to use the bandaid of comments for that very reason.

Comprehension and being able to read are different things. I can read English, it doesn't mean that I might understand what the author was attempting to convey.

Notes are meant for as "plain English" definitions of what is going on.

Think of it like this, someone who wants to learn how to program can read my GitHub, but likely would have no idea what any of it does without the comments.