Posts by Sir Runcible Spoon 5770 publicly visible posts • joined 29 May 2007
*All three PC's were delivered with network cards that had cloned MAC addresses. One of us would be mid-build (we had backbone connections to Sun's servers hosting the files) and it would suddenly stop, whilst someone else was building theirs quite merrily. Took a while to figure that one out - never expected duplicate MAC addresses on three different PC's!
Years ago myself and two colleagues were allowed to use our own build PC's at work - so we all had new kit and installed FreeBSD.
Apart from a few teething troubles* it was great, but since we were all running 'X' and all on the same LAN one person thought it would be fun to run some little programs in the background - you know the kind of thing - ants running over the screen, googley-eyes popping up everywhere etc., so we all did it to each other - the goal being to see how many you could get to run before the target noticed (ants running over the desktop aren't easy to see when you have 20 windows open at a time!).
Unfortunately, boys being boys it all escalated rather quickly, and I will have to admit I decided to employ The Art of War tactics on my fellows. Whilst they were busy tapping away and creating single key-press commands to inject programs onto my system, I decided to write a script to detect the source IP and then just run as many programs against that IP on port 6000 that my little CPU could handle.
It was quite funny to see one of my colleagues sneak a glance at my screen to see if I would notice anything before starting to send over his little ants and father christmas's, closely followed by 'what the fuck' as his PC descended into background app hell :)
Our manager decided to put a stop to it at that point, so I basically declared myself the winner :D
"convicting an innocent person is much more abhorrent than wrongly releasing a guilty person."
Whilst I agree with that statement, there are circumstances where it could be argued the other way. For example, if the guilty person you release goes on to murder a dozen innocent people, that's 12 people who have been killed plus all their family/friends etc. Detaining an innocent person affects one person + family/friends etc.
Of course, they're not really linked in any way, so it's not really a fair comparison, but I could see some people arguing the case. The rebuttal is that if you convict an innocent person of a crime, the guilty goes free and he could be the one who goes on to murder a further 12 people.
It all depends on whether the person arguing the case is prepared to think more deeply than surface effect - something which is distinctly lacking in these 'sound-byte' days of hell.
@veti, fair point - I didn't read the whole thing. The impression I had was that he was raising these points to describe why there weren't more women in technical roles and that it was down to their *choice* (which was based on biological differences - something I happen to agree with - as do ALL of the women I know).
However, if he was also claiming that they couldn't do their jobs because of those differences, well that's a different kettle of sea monkeys.
Most of the 'awkward' personalities in IT that present me with the most challenges are blokes - they don't listen to reason, but they are very prone to ego-boosting. Women aren't as daft, but if you tell them you respect their point of view (yet still disagree) you tend to get a lot more respect in return.
As someone said in another thread - it's horses for courses and we're all individuals (yes Brian, I'm looking at you!).
"I know enough extremely competent female software developers to say women don't write code well is bullshit"
The writer of the memo never claimed that afaik, in fact I believe he said the exact opposite. What he *did* say was that differences in the way the sexes think might account for the lack of women joining the ranks of programmers in the first place - that they are simply drawn to other things, things that involve relating to people more.
For example, we never really speak about how under-represented males are in HR departments do we?
I don't believe the chap in question was claiming it was biological, I think he was pointing out the various studies that showed that it was based on biology.
These days you don't seem to be able to bring up a controversial topic for discussion without being immediately pigeon-holed as being associated with the very worst of whatever the topic was you brought up.
Discernment and critical thinking appears to have been pressed out of people's brains by MSM/TV (a bit like apple juice is squeezed out of apples to make cider I reckon).
"Are you suggesting that the cartels, responsible for thousands of gang-related deaths in Mexico alone every year, shouldn't have their assets targeted?"
Now, now, you know very well I was objecting to the abuse of such laws, mostly allowed by the lack of control over their use. In answer to your other question, yes, I would object to these types of laws being abused in Europe as well :P
"Try <a href="https://www.cato.org/human-freedom-index>reading some actual expert opinion</a>"
In which report the US appears 23rd in the table, just above Latvia and below Estonia. Wow, way to not make a point :)
I'm pretty sure that the feeling of freedom (or lack of it) from the poster referring to the jaywalking was that in most places, crossing an empty road wouldn't have been prosecuted (unless it was a motorway, and even then a ticking off would suffice).
It may be media bias, but I don't have the impression that the US Police use a lot of discretion, they act more like the biggest gang on the block and then they are vilified for it. Hardly surprising is it?
@Matt
"The law in question states that items can only be confiscated when there is a real and demonstrated case that the items or money were the result of criminal activity"
That would be fine, but that isn't the case is it? If a police officer *suspects* that the asset is the result of criminal activity, then they can just take it. It is then up to the previous owner of the asset to prove that it wasn't the result of illegal activity.
Wide open to abuse, and it certainly has been. I didn't think even you could defend such an outrageously oppressive policy (unless you're trolling of course).
Someone actually served me pigs testicles dipped in breadcrumbs once (without having the grace to tell me what they were first).
When he asked me if I liked them, I said yes (which I did) and then he told me what they were. He was most disappointed* that I asked for more as they were that nice.
*If he'd known I'd watched Cannibal Holocaust as a child whilst eating Strawberry Jam on toast he'd have realised I wasn't sqeamish :)
Once, at a chicken-grab in Saudi, I ate a 'meat parcel'; turned out to be a sheeps eyeball, which I worked out for myself whilst I was wondering what the 'smartie' was that I was crunching on :)
This isn't an 'either/or' situation, the devices need to be secure and bug free AND the environment in which they are to be deployed should also be secure and locked down.
It isn't *that* hard to fathom, except that bean-counters seem to think that security is an optional feature. Start holding them accountable for security breaches and you'll see a marked change in budget priorities.
Although they'll probably still come up with something like "It costs $1bn to fix all the hardware flaws, but only $100m to sort out all the negative PR and fines".
Apart from the sheer crudity of the attempted humour (plus it's age) I think you'll find most people here won't find this amusing since many of us work in the field and the thought "but for the grace of God, there go I" springs to mind.
Even with all my security clearances I'm going nowhere near the US - who knows what they might conjure up just for shits and giggles. If there were any way to object and get legal representation etc. then it might be worth a risk - but this is the country where the Police are routinely stealing from tourists to fund their military hardware purchases and training.
Fuck No, thankyou very much.
I deliberately registered an obnoxious email address for this very reason. If I'm asked for my email address I tell them that they really don't want to know.
If they insist I then tell it to them.
In fact, the most surprising thing was that I was allowed to register 'suck-my-hairy-balls@...'* in the first place.
*This isn't the exact email address of course, I wouldn't be *that* silly :)
"I think the point is that if you buy in shops with cash and don't use loyalty cards then tracking your purchases is impossible"
I always offer the person behind me in the queue if they want my 'loyalty' points in whatever store I purchase in. If they try and match my credit card to store cards they will find a lot of hits :)
Plus it's a daily bit of charity that costs me nothing.
"Is that why the rest of the EU is out-performing the UK?"
Which has been put down to inflation as a result of the weaker pound rather than any underlying systemic growth issues. FX rates vary based on confidence, and Brexit knocked confidence in the pound. Ongoing uncertainty relating to the eventual agreement will continue for a couple of years yet I'd think - no-one suggested it was going to be an easy ride. However, it certainly hasn't been the doom & gloom disaster that was predicted has it?
Once we start showing a bit more spine and a little less 'whine' then perhaps confidence will come back, the pound will rally and we will be in a much stronger position. Time will tell. It doesn't do anyone any good to cry over spilt milk - let's just get on with the job and make the best of it eh?
"But agreed that it's trivial compared to, for example, motorbikes."
Really? What is the number of deaths caused by a motorbike (other than to the rider that is - after all, we're talking about non-optional deaths here from terrorism we should be talking about non-optional deaths in areas of comparison too. Anyone who rides a bike understands the risks but does it anyway, that doesn't make them a victim).
Iirc, the main reason to bring in electronic machines was to reduce the number of votes discounted due to 'hanging chads' or whatever.
The answer then, is simple. Press the screen for the candidate of your choice, machine prints out ticket with your vote on it - you then put it in a box so that it can then be counted later on.
Some things just shouldn't be too modernised. See Stainless Steel Rat for multiple reasons why.
"Imagine now you're a woman on your own or elderly and you see some jackass outside your house doing that?"
I could also imagine reporting someone behaving suspiciously and in possession of a chair leg.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
