Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Scams (Score 2) 158

by ePhil_One (#41002491) Attached to: Inside a Ransomware Money Machine

One day I'm going to be a senior citizen and my bullshit detector is going to stop working like it does for everyone else

Its not that it stops working, its just that its misaligned. You know MS would not call you directly, but Grandma doesn't. The rules we know to protect ourselves are completely alien to someone not immersed in the culture.

Comment: Re:R&D (Score 1) 225

by ePhil_One (#38541728) Attached to: What's Wrong With the US Defense R&D Budget?

It's true enough, though, that one of the reasons why many countries that could expect to face us on a battlefield do not focus too heavily on air assets

USSR focused heavily on air assets, and both the Mig-29 and Su-27 were very impressive planes. With the exception of the few F-22 ; most of our fighter aircraft are 1980's tech with some updates. Mash stolen Mig-29 & Su-27 designs (soviets feared China too) with 30 years of computer tech and China is test flying the Chinese designed/built J-20 stealth fighter already.

But there is a very short list of countries that expect to face us on the battlefield, countries equip themselves with air forces to defend against the countries that they DO expect to face on the battlefield. Isreal vs Arab nations, India vs Pakistan, etc. Unless you hit that tipping point of US/NATO involvement, you need to be able to stand on your own and there's plenty of evidence that air power is a significant force multiplier, whether its just piper cubs for scouting or the latest supersonic aircraft from the US/Russia/Europe. Witness the Falklands conflict, the US stayed out while the UK could only bring 30-odd Harrier's to the party to defend their far flung island outpost against Argentia's 120-odd aircraft. During this fight, the US never committed its airforce to one of its oldest allies.

In other words, count on the US to defend you at your own peril, but bury them if they do show up against you unless you are China/Russia.

It would also we wise to negotiate your way to settlement quickly. Before the 1st Gulf war, Saddam was a US ally, recieving lots of aid from the US in their war on Iran. There is evidence he may have thought he had the US's nod to invade Kuwait, and if he had agreed to pull out before the first bombs dropped, he'd likely still have one of the largest militaries in that region.

Comment: Re:So he hasn't learned a thing. (Score 1) 576

by ePhil_One (#38529542) Attached to: World's Worst PR Guy Gives His Side

"Clients have brought it up, but they've mainly laughed about it. I haven't lost any clients."

I'm trying to imagine the type of client that laughs about his PR rep being outed as an asshole who abuses their clients and the english language. At best he's been feeding them "his" version of events, and they haven't checked out the well documented reality of it yet. More likely, he's making them up as well since I've not seen anyone else linked to this guy despite the geek-cred bounty currently out on it

Also note that this is in direct contracts to the articles earlier sentence, (In the SAME paragraph, two sentences before) that he had in fact lost at least one client. Which sort of comes around to the fact that this is a very one sided, pro-Christoforo piece that twists actual events. Dave CC'ing several popular gaming sites with the email thread becomes the sinister Dave got the press involved, sending a lengthy recounting of his frustrations to Christoforo and a number of gaming news outlets, etc. Just an really poorly written article trying to syphon of the fame of this jackass.

Comment: Re:what space is there for the Fire?" (Score 1) 381

by ePhil_One (#38055364) Attached to: Reviews of Kindle Fire Are a Mixed Bag

A $200 device that will do both.

The standard Kindle is better is better for reading books because of the E-ink technology, which gives it longer battery life (by an order of magnitude) and better readability

The Kindle Fire gives up this advantage by using a color LCD screen, so it will suffer all the disadvantages of the iPad for ebooks. if it has a slower processor and less memory, it is very unlikely it will do the Media thing better. Which doesn't mean it will be a failure, its hitting a low price point, only the foolish will expect it to be as fast and responsive as the iPad2...

Comment: Re:Streisand Effect (Score 1) 581

by ePhil_One (#36244582) Attached to: Doctors To Patients: First, Do No Yelp Harm

And this is why normal people hate lawyers/government. Does it have to be so indirect and complicated? Without lawyers attempting to weasel their way out of obvious intents of plain language, we could have a much simpler legal system.

Lawyers are the result of people trying to weasel their way out of things, they bring consistency and repeatability into the process. Plain language is rarely as plain as you imagine it, just look at all the arguements over the second ammendment.

Comment: Re:Yes (Score 2) 396

by ePhil_One (#36000092) Attached to: Tasmanian Dept. of Education Wants Anti-Virus for Linux, OS X

The DoD's reasoning is pretty straightforward. There are few to no "in the wild" viruses or trojans for Linux/Mac (several worms though), but data rarely stays in one platform in an interconnected world. We put virus protection on every platform so that whenever a document or program is introduced on the network it gets scanned. That way if it has malware in it, even Windows malware on a Linux/Mac system, it's caught early. Just because I first put the document on a Linux system doesn't mean it's going to stay on a Linux system.

Exactly. 99% of what my Linux boxes scan for are Windows malware (viruses, worms, trojans, etc). I prefer to scan for such things on a box that is not succeptible to most things. Since websites, USB keys, and portable media, bittorrent, etc., mean virus can come into almost any system on the network, all machines shoudl be scanning for all viruses, whatever the platform.

Home users can do what they want, but in any larger networked environment where you don't have absolute control, this is absolutely neccessary.

Comment: Re:What I want to know (Score 1) 292

by ePhil_One (#35899268) Attached to: 50% of Apple's Revenue Comes From the iPhone

Carrier agreements just means paying for iPhones. They cost $640 on average, but the user pays $240 on average and the carrier pays the rest.

Actually, Carrier agreements means exclusivity deals, cross promotion payments, etc. Its not as simple as $640x18.4 million units. I'm not sure what exclusivity $ is out there now that its on two networks, or if Verizon is paying Apple to bring the iPhone to Verizon faster, etc. But if they are, that money is captured here.

Comment: Re:Plastic pipes... (Score 1) 358

by ePhil_One (#35822828) Attached to: New Houses Killing Wi-Fi

What freaks me out the most about new homes is the switch from copper to plastic for water pipeing.

Most the plastic pipe is actually better than copper. The old black pipe is bad of iron and actively rusts after a bit. Biggest issue is plastic sewer pipes, they are noisier than the old cast iron, and don't even get me started on clay sewer lines used in the ground.

Of course, there's at least 3 "modern" plastic pipes, PVC, CPVC, and PEX, I plan to go PEX (Cu is way to costly now), but admittedly older plastics could do bad things over a very long period of exposure, maybe. Talk to folks whose copper pipes need to be replaced after 10 years due to "pinhole" leaks which they wish their builder had used, or those who had their pipes stolen for scrap...

Comment: Re:Was Microsoft Riight? (Score 4, Interesting) 716

by ePhil_One (#35708520) Attached to: Apple's Secret Weapon To Win the Tablet Wars

Almost everyone that I know that buys one spends very little time thinking about what they stuff might actually "do" and instead want an iPad because that's the new cool gadget.

Yes, some significant percentage of early fit this category, its a classic early adopter profile. Some others likely have a very specific task in mind, from "watching videos in [Airplanes|Ranger Stations|etc] to [Important business function that would justify spending 10x more than it costs]. Don't make the mistake of assuming "People you know" = "World of all iPad consumers"

Which any decent tablet will do, but the others all seem like iPad ripoffs (as I guess they are), so people aren't interested in them.

Or perhaps they already have an iPod/iTunes library and see value in not switching. Or they looked at the application environments and chose Apple's locked down model of reliability of Andriods model of openness at the cost of instability/risk.

I just think people are first interested in the product, THEN its usefulness

That will get you through the early adopter phase, but without some sort of "Killer App" that the tablet does better, it will be a niche product that dies out (again). The vast majority of folks don't have money to bun experimenting with toys, if they don't have a VERY compelling reason to chose tablets over competitors (iPod's, Kindle, Netbooks, desktops, etc). Keep in mind the 5% rule too, if it works for 95% of what you want better but can't do the last 5%, it may get tossed aside as unworkable. This is why so many rural residents drive trucks, a car would be better 95% of the time, but they can only afford 1 vehicle and need the truck that 5% of the time, so they buy a truck.

Comment: Re:Bad guys (Score 3, Insightful) 370

by ePhil_One (#35592998) Attached to: Steve Jobs Questioned In iTunes Monopoly Suit
Exactly, that bastard Steve forced the record companies to accept his tyrannical 99 cent pricing policy and allow me to burn purchased songs to CD's where they can be ripped back to MP3 free of the restrictions! We must end his monopoly on rights restricted downloadable music for the iPod! Other companies MUST be free to sell us restricted license music & video for our iPods! Unite!

Comment: Re:diff(1) (Score 2) 184

by ePhil_One (#35382514) Attached to: Red Hat Stops Shipping Kernel Changes as Patches

Selective patching for reasons other than "you don't necessarily want to consume all of those fixes" I could understand, if I were to stipulate the hypothetical that some of the "fixes" aren't really "bug fixes" but optional enhancements. But really, in RH's kernel history, I can't remember very many of those (actually, I can't remember any).

Sometimes things aren't as simple as broken/not broken. Sometimes its fixed for some edge cases at a cost of slowdowns on all systems. Sometimes its removed functionality to prevent a security issue that may be irrelevant to me. You need to be very careful extending the particular "I've never had a problem" to the universal "No one has ever had a problem"

I long ago forgot the original issue, but I definitely recall having to build a custom kernel RPM package every time we decided to adopt the latest kernel fixes for our server farm to undo some "fix" Red Hat had installed that worked great in the majority of cases but broke badly in our environment; it was also obvious from the Bugzilla reports that we weren't the only ones and that Red Hat knew of the issue and were choosing not to undo it because they felt their fix helped more people than it hurt

The world is not octal despite DEC.

Working...