Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Can you mark your *own* Linux as secure to UEFI? (Score 1) 379

by erlkonig (#37488084) Attached to: Demystifying UEFI, the Overdue BIOS Replacement

The key point is whether the end user can install a signature for his *own* operating system in his own hardware, and then secure boot linux. Nothing in the document suggests this is possible (and MS slams linux as an older operating system for "enthusiasts", but that isn't really the point)

Government

Secret Service Runs At "Six Sixes" Availability 248

Posted by timothy
from the only-need-half-as-many dept.
PCM2 writes "ABC News is reporting that the US Secret Service is in dire need of server upgrades. 'Currently, 42 mission-oriented applications run on a 1980s IBM mainframe with a 68 percent performance reliability rating,' says one leaked memo. That finding was the result of an NSA study commissioned by the Secret Service to evaluate the severity of their computer problems. Curiously, upgrades to the Service's computers are being championed by Senator Joe Lieberman of Connecticut, who says he's had 'concern for a while' about the issue."
X

After 2 Years of Development, LTSP 5.2 Is Out 79

Posted by timothy
from the terminal-velocity dept.
The Linux Terminal Server Project has for years been simplifying the task of time-sharing a Linux system by means of X terminals (including repurposed low-end PCs). Now, stgraber writes "After almost two years or work and 994 commits later made by only 14 contributors, the LTSP team is proud to announce that the Linux Terminal Server Project released LTSP 5.2 on Wednesday the 17th of February. As the LTSP team wanted this release to be some kind of a reference point in LTSP's history, LDM (LTSP Display Manager) 2.1 and LTSPfs 0.6 were released on the same day. Packages for LTSP 5.2, LDM 2.1 and LTSPfs 0.6 are already in Ubuntu Lucid and a backport for Karmic is available. For other distributions, packages should be available very soon. And the upstream code is, as always, available on Launchpad."
Transportation

Porsche Unveils 911 Hybrid With Flywheel Booster 197

Posted by timothy
from the yeah-well-I-get-better-mileage dept.
MikeChino writes "Porsche has just unveiled its 911 GT3 R Hybrid, a 480 horsepower track vehicle ready to rock the 24-hour Nurburgring race this May. Porsche's latest supercar will use the same 911 production platform available to consumers today, with a few race-ready features including front-wheel hybrid drive and an innovative flywheel system that stores kinetic energy from braking and then uses it to provide a 160 horsepower burst of speed. The setup is sure to offer an advantage when powering out of turns and passing by other racers."

+ - Microsoft Brings BSOD to Sidekick->

Submitted by erlkonig
erlkonig (15872) writes "The sources are thin, and speculation high, but here are some of the ways Microsoft has suddenly *arrived* in the Sidekick mobile phone scene, helping a rabidly addicted user community finally break free from their nefarious Sidekicks and turn towards a someday-to-be-announced migration path forward."
Link to Original Source

Comment: Re:New 3D engine? (Score 1) 316

Newflash^2: Lag is explicitly network lag for any online game unless otherwise specified, since online lag completely overshadows almost all other types of local-to-host delays. If you're talking about a solo, unnetworked game, sure, "lag" might mean something else.

Now, of course, if you're talking to complete duffers, who will complain that their computer's slow when a remote webserver is slow to respond, and that the Internet is slow while their disk drive I/O light is solid on, and in almost all other ways have no idea what causes delays, then sure, "lag" could mean anything.

Comment: Network Solutions == policy corruption (Score 4, Informative) 74

by erlkonig (#28887845) Attached to: Inside the Rise of the Domain Name System

I've been on the Internet a long time, so I remember sri-nic.arpa, nic.ddn.mil, rs.internic.net, and even downloading the Internet host address file, with about 8000+ IPs in it. The early organization was very clear about preserving the namespace of domain names for future generations, with base policies (I believe these are all correct, but it might just be 3 out of 4) of:

* The domain name must relate to the purpose of your organization.

* .net is reserved for network infrastructure, .org for only non-profits, .com for commercial (.mil and .edu are still fairly pristine), etc.

* You must establish two nameservers, that must not be on the same subnet, and must already be providing DNS for the requested domain.

* Each requester gets a single domain, the idea being that the requester's entire organization would then be fully served.

Although they weren't really thinking about the upcoming explosion in web use, their thinking certainly allowed for an explosion in *sub* domain names. So instead of lots of ridiculous domains like www.iatemygrandmamovie.com, we might have later seen something like iatemygrandma.movie.com, with some group running a movie.com site, and an easy way to find a bunch of them, instead of the crapshoot we have now.

So where did the corruption set in? Once the idea of charging for a domain name popped up, some bright boy got a gleam in his eye when a company - I think it might have been Proctor and Gamble - violated registration policy by requesting scores of domain names based on ailments (and possibly some body parts). There was a similar polydomain request by some other group around the same time. Both generated a flurry of controversy. And our illustrious registrar suddenly demonstrated its modern, capitalist colors, dumping the past, conservative policies and making its new mission one of simply selling off every possible domain name, in every possible TLD, as fast as possible.

Effectively, they sold out on future generations' needs in an exercise of total, corrupt greed. The registrar flipped on every policy, encouraging multiple registration of domains, flagrantly pushing registration in every possible TLD, dropping the domain server requirement, dropping the relevancy concept, and now even pushing for more TLDs, in order to sell even more completely unnecessary extra domains.

The idea of allowing some company to register thousands of obviously unrelated domains for cybersquatting would have been anathema in the pre-profit days, but Network Solutions just doesn't care. And that ridiculous article completely misses *all* of this.

Anyone can do any amount of work provided it isn't the work he is supposed to be doing at the moment. -- Robert Benchley

Working...