Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Technical solution to a social problem. (Score 1) 88

Ha. You make me laugh. People such as yourself have bad memories, or lived in some kind of sheltered environment. Every generation is convinced that the generation after them are the spawn of satan, and when THEY were that age they were all just perfect angels, or at the very least a HELL of a lot better than the current lot of miscreants. The attitude you're projecting has been common for at least the last 60 years.

Uhh.. when _I_ was that age about 20 years ago people were hacking into the computer science workstations, sniffing passwords, hacking root, running a bazillion processes on the box, etc. The only thing that's changed is now it's Linux machines, not SunOS machines.

Comment: Technical solution to a social problem. (Score 4, Insightful) 88

If your users can't play nice together, the solution isn't to treat the place like a prison with automated systems enforcing a hard and fast set of rules.

The solution is for users to create their own enforcement. If some guy tries to take all the resources across your network with distcc, then the people affected should be able to notice that and tell the guy to knock that the fuck off.

In other words, give the users the freedom to break stuff, but also the knowledge to find out who'd breaking their stuff. It'll serve them far better than creating a walled garden where someone else has the responsibility to enforce social rules.

Slashdot and reddit work this way. Neither go around trying to enforce how people behave, they give the users the power to do that themself.

Comment: Re:This makes sense. (Score 1) 278

by Vellmont (#47468441) Attached to: Selectively Reusing Bad Passwords Is Not a Bad Idea, Researchers Say

Many of them, however, have to follow outdated and impractical guides forced upon them by government standards in order to comply with HIPA, SOX, or PCI.

Don't blame the goverment for that. SOX doesn't specify passwords, it's an accounting standard that leaves that to the accounting industry. PCI is a credit card processing standard, and isn't set by the goverment.

Your instincts are simply incorrect. You think bad standards==government. Pure BS. Bad standards are bad standards and they're set all the time by large organizations. Much of what you're complaining about are bad standards set by accountants who really have no business setting these standards. It's the IT industry that needs to push on these people to change.

Comment: Re:Murphy says no. (Score 1) 265

by Vellmont (#47445147) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Unattended Maintenance Windows?

I don't believe I mentioned the number of people, merely that upgrading when nobody was using the system creates another risk that you won't know about till much later.

People in IT seem to want the "perfect" solution, which doesn't exist, or at the very least a black/white kind of thinking. Everything is tradeoffs and it's important to understand what those tradeoffs are. I've also seen people seem to think all situations and organizations are the same. (Obviously very, very wrong).

But I will say this. In some cases the best solution might be to upgrade the system when people are still using it that it can be switched back quickly.

Comment: Re:Murphy says no. (Score 1) 265

by Vellmont (#47432433) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Unattended Maintenance Windows?

  say the patch unexpectedly breaks another critical function of the server. It happens, if you have been in IT any time you have seen it happen

Yes, this happens all the time. And really it's a case for doing the upgrade when people are actually using the system. If the patch happens at 2am (chosen because nobody is using it at 2am), nobody is going to notice it until the morning. The morning, when the guy who put in the patch is still trying to recover from having to work at 2am. At the very least groggy, and not performing at his/her best.

Comment: Re:Can't we just say people took naked pics? (Score 1) 231

by Vellmont (#47416759) Attached to: Avast Buys 20 Used Phones, Recovers 40,000 Deleted Photos

All those erase cycles would wear out the flash memory much faster.

The wear limits, and wear leveling on flash memory are such that even with heavy usage you'd still outlive the lifetime of the phone by an order of magnitude at least. (on the order of 1,000,000 erases). A phone is never even going to approach heavy usage. So I reject the idea that we can't erase because it'll wear out the flash memory prematurely.

Comment: Can't we just say people took naked pics? (Score 4, Insightful) 231

by Vellmont (#47412969) Attached to: Avast Buys 20 Used Phones, Recovers 40,000 Deleted Photos

Why do we still talk like we're in middle school? Why the code talking? "personal pictures", "manhood"? Can't we just say they found pictures of guys penises, and nude to semi-nude women?

People take nude photos of themselves, don't realize it's still on the phone, and sell the thing. The fault lies with the cell phone makers who aren't actually doing real deletes of pictures. That's just dumb. Back when storage medium was on a hard drive, and computers do a LOT of IO, deleting the reference to the file made sense to improve performance. But all phones use flash as storage, and there's simply not a lot of IO that's going on in your typical phone usage. The OS should be wiping the file, or at the very least remove the reference, and wipe the file at a later (but soon) time after (like perhaps while the user is typing something and is otherwise idle).

The reality is phones get stolen, and the data is far less secure than on a PC. The OS needs to keep up with that. Deleting data for good should mean actually deleting the data. The shortcuts that've been done in the past should be a thing of the past.

Comment: Re:The Future's So Bright (Score 2) 415

by Vellmont (#47410039) Attached to: Python Bumps Off Java As Top Learning Language

Bad developers are bad no matter what. But good developers make less mistakes in a language where there's less freedom and ease to make mistakes. The recent openSSL bug is a good example. The person who made the mistake isn't a bad programmer, but he did make a dumb mistake. Something that wouldn't have even been possible in an intepreted language.

Tools DO make a difference. They can very easily save you from yourself and not allow you to do things that you really shouldn't be doing.

Comment: Re:NO-NO-NO, a thousand times NO! (Score 1) 468

Which tells me that something is wrong with the warning systems if Pilots are ignoring them. Pilots aren't idiots, but a warning system that's too sensitive is useless. If the check-engine light on your car comes on all the time because your gas cap isn't tight enough, do you start ignoring it? Then when it comes on for a legitimate reason, you're probbably going to still ignore it.

I don't know what's going on here, but the fact that two different pilots ignored warning systems in the same plane that led to disasters tells me the problem might not be with the pilots, but with the warning systems. Why are the pilots ignoring them? Hubris is one answer, but a warning system that trains you to ignore it is another.

Comment: Maximum Overdrive. (Score 1) 142

by Vellmont (#47388785) Attached to: Autonomous Trucking

Finally an excuse to re-make the terrible movie Maximum Overdrive. If you're one of the 99% of the population that's never heard of it, it's a movie where the trucks go crazy, drive themselves, and try to kill all of humanity. An interesting concept, but horribly executed. Based on a book by Stephen King, some nut let him direct it.

Comment: Re:That's not going to make (Score 1) 105

by Vellmont (#47383431) Attached to: London Regulator Says Uber Is Operating Legally

Umm.. you do realize that if the Google technology is all that great, then the experienced cabbies can just get one of the traffic broadcast tools.

Which is better, experienced London cabbie+technology, or some random guy+technology?

The london cabbie is also regulated on price. Ueber has "surge" pricing, so you can suddenly be gouged by Ueber when they detect a period when they can get away with charging more.

Comment: How to prove the source code maps to the binary? (Score 4, Insightful) 178

So.. Microsoft let governments of the world look at the source code at your special center, and then double-dog-swears that there's nothing fishy going on between then, and compiling the source code, like say a patch applied somewhere in the build process? Riiiight.

If you WERE to put a backdoor in, that's probably how it'd be done. Would you really want a backdoor explicitly in the code for a developer to find? Of course not, you'd put in something only a few people know about. The secret to secret keeping is limiting the amount of people who know.

The other way to hide the backdoor is to make it a hard to find bug. Plausible deniability is quite high.

I have to believe this is good news though. It means a lot of foreign governments are suspicious of closed source software, to the point where Microsoft has had to announce a plan to make their code however less closed source.

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