Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:What exactly does it do? (Score 2) 249

by ScytheBlade1 (#41231611) Attached to: Microsoft Releases Windows Server 2012

Sorry, but at least two of your points are factually incorrect.

* ReFS is lacking a few notable features, including file compression / encryption, sparse files, hard links, extended attributes, disk quotas, and others[1]. You could say that the only notable improvements over NTFS that it has would be much improved resiliency and higher capacity limits. You can't compare this to BrtFS. At all. The two aren't even in the same ballpark. ReFS is there to store millions of large files and managed bad blocks in a smart way without taking the volume offline. It supports little else.
* Dynamic access control can't even be compared to SELinux. SELinux can restrict a program to running from a certain location, it can restrict which ports in the TCP/IP stack it can/can't open, it can restrict which hosts a specific process can talk to, and yes, it can alter the fundamental view of the file system hierarchy based upon access levels granted. Dynamic access control is really just more complexity in the form of an ACL on top of the already present windows file system ACLs, and it impacts nothing outside of files[2]. Now, you can use claims (which dynamic access control is built upon, at least partially) to control other aspects of your environment, but that isn't "dynamic access control" as far as MS is concerned. Further, it really is another layer of complexity -- if your claims server (which is a web server(!)) goes down, you're losing access to stuff (but if you're a decent sized MS shop, this will likely not be an issue, as you're already maintaining decent uptime on your DCs). Then the file system level ACL comes into play again. It's going to be crazy stupid hard to diagnose a claims access issue in a large production environment, no matter what MS has done towards fixing these issues. Somewhat amusingly, dynamic access control isn't supported on ReFS at all [2].

Now normally I'd just trust you that you googled around to find this stuff, but you've got some powershell in your signature, which leads me to believe that you've done a bit more checking than the "stereotypical slashdot linux sysadmin" and this only goes towards scaring me a bit.

[1] http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2012/01/16/building-the-next-generation-file-system-for-windows-refs.aspx
[2] http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/hh831717.aspx

Comment: Re:What's best (Score 2) 411

by ScytheBlade1 (#39794167) Attached to: Firefox 12 Released — Introduces Silent, Chrome-like Updater

Aw crap, you're one of *those* engineers who manage to break their machine every 30 days like clockwork, and who makes the life of everyone involved with fixing PCs in a big corporation miserable.

Two sides to the coin... I'm not saying that any one side is more right than the other, but seriously, two sides to the coin.

Comment: Re:This isn't really hot-OS switching. (Score 1) 239

by ScytheBlade1 (#37583490) Attached to: Hot Multi-OS Switching — Why Isn't It Everywhere?

It's almost entirely unrelated to virtualization. This is more like highlighting the fact that you can switch browsers by hitting alt+tab, only they built the alt+tab button into the hardware.

It's more complex than that (because every one of those will have a different libc, and android doesn't use the same libc, never mind the rest of the libraries), but functionally that's what userspace switching is. The same kernel (OS) keeps running...

Comment: This isn't really hot-OS switching. (Score 2, Informative) 239

by ScytheBlade1 (#37583192) Attached to: Hot Multi-OS Switching — Why Isn't It Everywhere?

> All OS are running on the 2.6.32 Linux kernel, and got several optimizations to take benefits of the advanced instructions available in the chipset.
>
> Note that you will not be able to install Windows OS or Mac OS on the Touch Book or the Smart Book.

Yes, you can do some cool things with linux. Including switching out the userspace pretty quickly. That's all that this looks like. The kernel isn't changing, from the looks of it.

Comment: Re:Time to shift focus to another kernel? (Score 1) 142

by ScytheBlade1 (#37312298) Attached to: Linux Kernel Moves To Github

Except that as you noted, this prompts for activation. That's the purpose of sysprep -reseal, and I hope that it doesn't present any problems. What you are functionally doing with this is reinstalling the non-core OS components, which is... somewhat higher risk than otherwise. ...

Use at your own discretion.

Comment: Re:Ubisofts DRM (Score 5, Informative) 233

by ScytheBlade1 (#34730634) Attached to: Ubisoft's Draconian DRM Patched?

"When it works" isn't what bothers me. What bothers me is this disclaimer at the bottom of the steam page:

> A PERMANENT HIGH SPEED INTERNET CONNECTION AND CREATION OF A UBISOFT ACCOUNT ARE REQUIRED TO PLAY THIS VIDEO GAME AT ALL TIMES AND TO UNLOCK EXCLUSIVE CONTENT. SUCH CONTENT MAY ONLY BE UNLOCKED ONE SINGLE TIME WITH A UNIQUE KEY. YOU MUST BE AT LEAST 13 TO CREATE A UBISOFT ACCOUNT WITHOUT PARENTAL CONSENT. UBISOFT MAY CANCEL ACCESS TO ONLINE FEATURES UPON A 30-DAY PRIOR NOTICE PUBLISHED AT http://assassinscreed.com/ ... which to me says, "we can nuke your access to the game at any point in time, provided we give you 30 days notice on a website you're never going to check."

I own AC1, but I don't own AC2 or HAWX 2 for this very reason.

DRM is likely here to stay, at least to some degree, but this frightens the ever living crap out of me. Why would I throw money at a game where they can cut off access to it at any point in time for ALL of their customers, just because they don't want to pay the bill on those servers anymore?

Comment: Re:WTF is wrong with you people? (Score 1) 606

by ScytheBlade1 (#33834928) Attached to: How Long Until We Commonly Use Flying Cars?

I voted never not because I think the things you listed won't happen, but rather, that they could be put the more effective uses on things other than multiple-ton flying hunks of metal.

What is a car? A large, heavy, hunk of metal with some number of wheels and a navigation method, that navigates the world.

So what happens when you have a small, lightweight object with no wheels that gets you from point A to point B? Is it still a car?

And second, we don't really need it to fly... it serves no purpose other than looking neat.

Comment: Re:Blizzard? (Score 1) 356

by ScytheBlade1 (#33258076) Attached to: Blizzard Sues Private Server Company, Awarded $88M

Region locks

Just like WoW, with a net benefit in terms of latency. I don't want to hit the ladder button and get get a minimum of 400ms+ of latency (but I would like to be able to at least join a custom game with them).

"connectivity" with social networking sites

Given the SC2 playerbase, there are more people who have a facebook account than otherwise. I hate it personally, but generally speaking, it wasn't a stupid decision on their part.

no chat/clans/channels

All of which are coming in a future patch..

a single character name

While I do wish they had an option to reset your account and generate a new name, I really only see this as a positive change. A massive cut down on trolling, and bans meaning something.

Not that it matters much, SC2 ladder is compromised already due to rampant maphacking.

Sure there are indeed maphacks already, but calling their usage rampant is a bit of a stretch. Blizzard has never instantly banned people for "hacking." It comes in waves, like you know, these banning sprees of 7,700, 350,000, and then 320,000.




Just to reiterate:

Activision has nothing to do with anything they've done recently, and anyone who says otherwise is blaming something they don't like on a company of convinence.

Comment: Re:Blizzard? (Score 5, Insightful) 356

by ScytheBlade1 (#33255248) Attached to: Blizzard Sues Private Server Company, Awarded $88M
Oh they cared before. Remember BnetD?

That was WAY before Activision. They report their income on different balance sheets; the only effective change in Blizzard mindset was the part where they went public.

Activision has nothing to do with anything they've done recently, and anyone who says otherwise is blaming something they don't like on a company of convinence.

Comment: Re:Unlimited already means 5G (Score 4, Interesting) 319

by ScytheBlade1 (#32625326) Attached to: Verizon Hints At Scrapping Unlimited Data Plans
Sorry to reply to myself, but I thought I linked this.

http://www.intomobile.com/2007/11/03/verizon-wireless-when-we-say-unlimited-data-we-mean-5gb-worth-of-unlimited-data.html

While that article is just as good at trolling a subject line as the OP is, the part we care about is this:

And, should you exceed the 5GB/month limit on your “unlimited” plan, Verizon will “reduce throughput speeds of any application that would otherwise exceed such speed to a maximum of approximately 200Kbps” – with actual speeds “subject to change.

It remains functionally unlimited, and the same type of cap pre-5GB applies: connection speed. Just a different speed.

Comment: Re:Unlimited already means 5G (Score 4, Informative) 319

by ScytheBlade1 (#32625216) Attached to: Verizon Hints At Scrapping Unlimited Data Plans
It isn't a 5GB cap. You're free to transfer as much as you please.

Anything over 5GB gets rate limited to 56k speeds, though.

They're giving you unlimited data, and past 5GB, you still have unlimited data. It just isn't fast, and nothing in their terms of use prohibits this. You can't really drop a class-action lawsuit against them doing that either.

You're not fined for going over 5GB, just throttled.

Make headway at work. Continue to let things deteriorate at home.

Working...