roeme

I think it's safe to invoke Betteridge's Law here.

Anyone working in this space can tell you that's still the age-old discussion: Wether it was mainframes vs. microcomputers, containers vs. VM's, microservices vs. monolithic applications. Sometimes a particular architecture was preferred, sometimes the other. And none have gone away for good, and none have taken up the market completely. Essentially, the answer depends on your requirements (And the world just isn't binary).

The only thing that's for sure is that distributed systems are here to stay – but how you call the various abstraction layers forming them up really doesn't matter. All that really changes (currently) is the size of the market, or the shares therein.

Some of you might remember that we did the 'cloud' before it was called as such, and while the terms I/P/SaaS weren't known under this moniker, it was already in use.

I do feel that the replication/failover story needs a lot of work, but there's been some progress towards getting it in the box. Even digging into any kind of HA strategy is cumbersome to say the least (short of a 5-6 figure support contract)

Eeeh...a simple HA solution can be developed in about a week (I was able to do so on 9.3, and so far, it held it's ground). Also, now with 9.5's pg_rewind you can easily switch back and forth between nodes (http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.5/static/app-pgrewind.html), simplifying things a great deal. Can't imagine that's 5-6 figures.

I agree that you don't get a Plug&Play-Solution out of the box, but from anecdotal evidence they often don't quite work as advertised anyway (remember 1995? And I'm sure your friendly DBA has some stories to share as well).

I wouldn't be surprised if you were a markov chain.

It must be the holidays, where the experienced netops spend time away from HN and trivial poc's for old well-known attacks get upvotes.

Somewhat OT; As a swiss, the omitted ö is really beginning to bug me.

It's Zöpfli. Gopferteckel.

(The second word is a somewhat soft cuss word - But don't try to use it as a non-native).

Also, you can't "zopfli" something - it's a noun! You "zöpf" - or, since we're in the alemannic german space; "zöpfle".

/rant /vent

If this piqued your interest; or left you wondering, I'd recommend reading Piketty's "Capital in the twenty-first Century".

As Graham's piece concludes; if we don't do something, we'll get into trouble.

- « Terrific work causes us to think of additional questions. »

(...) the "doesn't matter, I'll be dead soon" card.

This mindset is what creates a _lot_ of problems; while some decisions do not matter greatly for oneself, they do for others and/or even more so for future generations.

I think many people grasp this concept in the context of polluted oceans et al., but fail to do so when it comes to the real-world manifestations of 1984 and the like.

If you're considering replacing your current (assumedly homegrown) solution; I'd recommend using lsyncd instead.

(We do as well). From what I see, the only advantage this offers over lsyncd is that Windows is supported.

Did you and parent poster not see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10032621 ? It comes into play there.

As to "why?", I assume it's asked in jest.

They are also dirt cheap to buy ($20 - 30K) but they burn A LOT of fuel.

She does. However, given a well-maintained engine, and 10 to 12 passengers, cars are easily rivaled, and given favourable conditions, even undercut. We did the math, briefly said, the plane has a higher cruise speed, and can fly in a straight line between destination, etc. pp.

I'd always day-dreamed about getting one but I can't imagine it's practical.

Well...I co-own one with some other crazy blokes. While a 3.5-ton dry mass can't be put into the bike rack in front of your house, it hardly affects your daily life. I.e. she's next-to-none more inconvenient than owning a small Cessna or the like.

Edit: Judging from your user name, there's a different story though. From what I've heard, the U.S./FAA doesn't really like this soviet plane, and you've got some artificial prohibitive rules on it (compared to Europe).

Interestingly, it doesn't even trade maximum speed for being unstallable.

Depends on how you interpret it. The bi-plane design does impose quite a drag at higher speeds. There has been research into making the design faster, so far, that meant getting rid of the lower wings.

On the other hand, the designer never intended her to go fast.

For those of you located in Switzerland; you can "hitch" a ride at http://an2.ch – though you must become a club member or ride as a guest of another member (This is required by swiss law for non-commercial flights). Another possibility is to show up at airshows; where tours may be, and are given to the visitors for a modest fee.

It's quite an impressive experience, especially while starting, when the audio of the power plant's huge displacement is felt by your stomach.

I did, but as you said by yourself, it's short on info.

The conflict resolution is where the meat is, isn't it? And https://github.com/amark/gun/wiki/Conflict-Resolution-with-G... is incredibly hard to read and doesn't really answer questions.

When I read your responses, I can‘t shake the feeling I'm talking to some snake oil salesman in a nice suit.¹

And to be honest, GUN‘s docs sound similar. Heavy on how to use, and how awesome everything is, but as soon as one tries to understand stuff, it‘s either WIP or “team up with me/us!”. eyebrow rises

And the claim of “building up connection with academics and hiring them” falls perfectly in line with this. Why the hell can‘t you describe what you did by yourself? If it's so awesome, why don‘t you just die to explain it to everyone who asks? Or, $DEITY forbid, should the “academics” lend some credibility to GUN, even if it's with just their title? What's this HAM about?

Maybe it's just me, but all this with a rather complex naming convention (souls...) and code...

eh, I'll go with “show us teh algoz”. Or describe it.

¹) To illustrate: « I'm actively working [...]» – I'd like to see you passively working.

Seconded, I plowed through the “wiki” (not really one) and the code for a bit, but gave up after while.

Doesn't have to be LaTeX for me, as long as it’s a comprehensive documentation.

(When OriFS was introduced here, the papers really helped to grok).

Usually, there are practically no downsides to it, unless there is a fundamental problem in your $ORG.

1. First of all, it will get you connected to the users which depend on your $APP/$SYS. Hard. You will get to know their struggle/woes - it's not just some ticket you can work on at your leisure.

2. If it's your stuff that causes problems, you will get your shit together and make sure that it works, code defensively, and test thoroughly - whatever necessary. After all, you don't want to deprive yourself unnecessarily of sleep – or others, after the experience.

3. If it's not your stuff that causes problems, you'll get the oppurtunity to “yell” at the people responsible for it. And they must act on it - nobody cares on the why or what, if people have to get up in the middle of the night, it costs the company¹, and everybody gets upset.

It only impacts your health if you get called up regularly, and no actions are taken to remove the root causes of it. Or you can't take any.

It's less of a technical problem, but more an organizational one, so – as it already has been said in here – you should talk to the people of the team, not HN.

¹) If it doesn't cost them, be wary.

Honestly, the first thing I did after playing for a half a minute was downloading the track, and trying to find out who made it.

Hope there will be more tracks in this style (skyur wasn't really for me).

I do more or less agree with you, but:

what's the point of building something badly that you can buy COTS from any hardware store for only slightly more than what she spend on this thing?

Tinkering. Hacking. Learning.

turn AC on and off through cutting off power) will wreak havoc on her AC

I don't know alot about AC's (I generally eschew them), but there is one line in the article:

Make sure that your AC is always set to be ‘on’, we’re bypassing the air conditioner’s normal on/off control system.

I can't image they've got a complicated startup sequence if they've got an "always-on" setting? Or am I wrong?

As most of the times, there are about a hundred different – not all of them necessarily better – ways to achieve the goal of this project. No issue there.

Putting part of such a project to $SHAREDHOSTINGSERVICE however, that's were I'd stop.

Then again, more sensitive stuff floats around on the intertubes.

(Also, not serving it by yourself feels like stopping halfway, and not in the hackers-do-take-shortcuts-way).

My critique was aimed at the form of the disclosure, not the act itself. This may have not gotten through for various reasons.

Really? He gave you two tips, didn't he?

I do stand corrected. Either the last paragraph was edited into the article after I wrote my comment, or I did not see it the first time. Unfortunately, I can no longer edit my previous comment.

If I could, I would kick the guys responsible¹ for the disclosure in the ass. Why? We now have a youtube video with shitty music (proving essentially nothing), some scaremonger articles with a lot of prose around very few interesting bits, and most importantly, a friggin' hashtag. And of course, a name for the vuln.

But nothing, absolutely nothing, on how to protect myself as an ordinary user. The only thing I was able to infer from the craptastic video is that the user they're escalating from is member of the "admin" group, i.e. not a "Standard User" but an "Admin" in OS X lingo.

Among other things, the most obvious difference to regular Accounts is that "Admin" users can use sudo by default, but no clue whatsoever is exploited here. Some pipe-fu with sudo? Or a stupid setting by apple allowing "admin" group members doing dangerous things without (re-)authentication?

In closing, best make sure you're using OS X as a "Standard" User, not "Admin". In my experience, it's quite painless.

Edit: > "Normally there are 'sudo' password requirements, which work as a barrier, so the admin can't gain root access without entering the correct password. However, rootpipe circumvents this," he says.

This at least hints at the possibility that said exploit does not work from a standard user. So there's that...

¹most likely not the researchers themselves, but some "CEO" or other suit-level.

You got it in the reverse; the shielding is to ensure conformance. It's part of the device.

1080p on a 27" monitor is not ridiculously low res for the average person.

OTOH, now I have to disagree with you a bit. I'm currently using 1080p on a 24" and while I'm ok with it so far (everyone else using the screen, ranging from ages 10 to 55 has no issue either), I would under no circumstances go lower than this. And it's not like my vision has improved since my 20's (in the 30s currently).

But, as the interested reader realizes at this point, it really boils down more to the defition of 'average person'.

To me, the main beneficiaries of the new 5K iMac are designers and people who work with (or care a lot about) video and photography

Did you intend to leave out programmers? I'm asking because for instance, I prefer to do my readings on paper than on screen; simply because of the higher dpi/'ppi'. And after having worked a bit with a Retina display, I can't almost can't wait to do my work on one...

but it's more important that it takes desktop computing is finally moving on from ridiculous low res displays.

The question is, how long will it take until high res becomes available broadly? Apple had to create their own¹ display here, and I doubt they'll share the secret sauce lightly. I suspect they're already holding back, since I'm in search for some Hi-Res desktop display for some time now. Almost everybody cheats by simply upping the display size, instead of the pixel density. And it's not like the retina display hasn't been around for 2 years now!

It's either that, or they're simply scooping up all or a significant amount of the available supply for themselves.

¹To some extent, i.e. at least the controller chip

Seconding that, and it should be well known around here that Apple in many cases wasn't the first company with a certain product – and they don't need be. (Though I'm really curious how the whole watch thing turns out)

TL;DR Article's point unclear, essentially a list (of existing-pre-apple stuff), the only remote possibility of a point long well known.

less was started (~ '83) before getopt() was made available to the 'general' public ('85).

My guess is nobody bothered to replace these parts, since options were only added gradually; if at all. Coincidentally i'm in the same predicament with a tool a coworker of mine (initially) wrote, convoluted option parsing to say the least; but I'm too busy with fixing other parts or adding proper functionality to it than to replace it.

Sometimes, 'less is more'.

We had a similar experience with our dysons. They begun to fall apart after 1-2 years. Granted, it was a three-story house with 7 family members and two dogs, so they had to take some abuse, but still, we expected more (than just innovation) at this price point.

OS X' Preview.app gets it right.

Interesting, I never encountered this phrase as well – is it dialect?