Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: jmfbahciv on 2 Mar 2007 06:36 In article <es829g$2hl$2(a)blue.rahul.net>, kensmith(a)green.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote: >In article <87fy8paqu8.fsf(a)nonospaz.fatphil.org>, >Phil Carmody <thefatphil_demunged(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: >>kensmith(a)green.rahul.net (Ken Smith) writes: >>> >ls -lu >>> >>> I assume you had a point. >> >>I think his point is that access time is part of the metadata >>that accompanies the file. > >It is not stored into the data part of the file. The file's sectors are >not rewritten so there is no change to that part. I believe that it is >the time you close the file and not the time you opened it that actually >ends up stored BTW. None of this matters to the backup method I >suggested. > > > >>So we have 3 cases: >>- If it doesn't change the last-accessed time, then the "last- >>accessed time" is in fact a falsity; >>- If it changes the last-accessed time and stores the new access, >>then the restored file will not be what it was a backup of; >>- If it changes the last-accessed time but doesn't store the new >>time, then the file in the backup is not identical to the >>filesystem that it is a backup of. >>All three of these are unsatisfactory. Therefore I contend that >>this field is indeed not a useful field when it comes to considering >>the behaviour of backups. > >No, this is all silly. The backup I have been refering to is not cover in >the cases in your list. What I suggested was a complete image of the >drive. That has the problem of also preserving the bad spots of the disk. I'm assuming that you do want an image of the disk and not drive. >This would store the times as they were at the time archive was >made and not change anything about any of them > >The only times that matter for backup are the time of creation and the >last modification. It doesn't matter when the last access happened. You are in error. Last access is an important datum. /BAH
From: jmfbahciv on 2 Mar 2007 06:40 In article <MPG.2050cf07addd0e6298a031(a)news.individual.net>, krw <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote: >In article <0sccu2tencv0vqes1nru8uec7if9e8f4cm(a)4ax.com>, >MassiveProng(a)thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org says... >> On Wed, 28 Feb 2007 15:02:48 -0500, krw <krw(a)att.bizzzz> Gave us: >> >> >In article <97v6u2hhdaf437oki5ujqt4q3gkjghn3dv(a)4ax.com>, >> >MassiveProng(a)thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org says... >> >> On Mon, 26 Feb 07 12:36:17 GMT, jmfbahciv(a)aol.com Gave us: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >The wrinkle to the new process is that the checks have stopped >> >> >traveling. >> >> >> >> >> >> Bullshit. My landlord gets a check, and his bank submits it to my >> >> bank who has it ON FILE RIGHT NOW, I get an image of the check in my >> >> mailed monthly statement, and can look up a full size image of all my >> >> checks online. >> > >> >Dumber-than-a-dim-bulb, you're wrong. >> >> No. You are. I can even request the return of the check. > >Not if it's been cleared via "check 21". The check paper check is >turned into bits and the hard copy destroyed. This is the bug in the process, IMO. The process depends on the human, who is scanning the physical paper, to destroy it. <snip> /BAH
From: jmfbahciv on 2 Mar 2007 06:45 In article <es84ft$5ks$1(a)blue.rahul.net>, kensmith(a)green.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote: >In article <87y7mhb0fx.fsf(a)nonospaz.fatphil.org>, >Phil Carmody <thefatphil_demunged(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > >[.... swapping ...] >>Wrong. If it's not moved onto the swap medium, it's lost. >>My kind of computing doesn't like losing data, yours might, >>but as we know BAH computing is BAD computing. > >This is almost exactly right. The write to the swap volume is only needed >if the page is dirty (ie: has been written to) > >This is part of the "complex issues" skipped to keep the list short. Do you think that a swapper moves pages from the RAM to the swap file? /BAH
From: jmfbahciv on 2 Mar 2007 07:12 In article <PSDFh.4217$854.1426(a)trnddc04>, "John Barrett" <ke5crp1(a)verizon.net> wrote: > >"krw" <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote in message >news:MPG.2050c846d665a64098a02e(a)news.individual.net... >> In article <es6g5o$8qk_001(a)s985.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, >> jmfbahciv(a)aol.com says... >>> In article <MPG.204fae3c3b2b61c298a019(a)news.individual.net>, >>> krw <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote: >>> >In article <es160h$8qk_005(a)s924.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, >>> >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com says... >>> >> In article <MPG.204cc17fb115629c98a000(a)news.individual.net>, >>> >> krw <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote: >>> >> >In article <erul1i$8qk_008(a)s965.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, >>> >> >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com says... >>> >> > >>> >> >> So far, I haven't been >>> >> >> able to develop any process that people, such as my parents, will >>> >> >> be able to use. >>> >> > >>> >> >How about PayPal, or the equivalent? >>> >> >>> >> Doesn't that involve online-edness? >>> > >>> >Likely. I don't know if there is a way around this. >>> >>> The more I investigate, the more I'm finding that there is no way. >>> Depending on power and networks being up just to eat is not >>> my idea of self-sufficiency. >>> >>> > >>> >> I smell a bad odour w.r.t. >>> >> PayPal because it's name is being used as spam for gathering >>> >> financial data. >>> > >>> >I've never seen any evidence of either, other than the billions >>> >phishing attempts. ...just don't bite the bait! >>> >>> Right. But if you're doing this paypal stuff for your financial >>> business, how in the hell are you going to distinguish between >>> fishing and acutal business? This is an area that nobody seems >>> to be addressing...at least I can't smell a whiff of it looking >>> at it from the outside. >> >> Simple: If email is from PayPal it's a phishing attempt Email from >> eBay has your username embedded in it (a simple mail filter puts >> those phishing attempts where they belong). >> >>> >> I haven't studied PayPal yet. My mother is >>> >> quickly coming to the conclusion that checks are not a Good Thing. >>> >> They do everything checks, including buy groceries. I don't >>> >> like her carrying cash because of the gangs that have been >>> >> imported from Viet Nam and Mexico. >>> > >>> >Credit cards are likely the most secure, personally. >>> >>> She has never had a credit card. >> >> It's time to get her one. Just make sure it's paid on time. >> >>> >> My next experiment is to investigate debit cards that you buy >>> >> outright and have no information embeded that can tie the >>> >> transaction back to a personal bank account. >>> > >>> >Watch out for the scam where the numbers are copied off the rack >>> >where they're displayed. >>> >>> I first have to find the rack. This would have been a job for >>> super-JMF to go hunting for me :-). >> >> They have (or had at Christmas) them in the grocery stores here. >> You might also try your bank for Cisa/MC logoed ones. >> >>> I'm beginning to think that my approach is going to be the best >>> way. Dump some cash into the coffers of the biller twice a year. >>> That's what I'm doing at the moment and it seems to work for >>> everything but credit cards. Congress passed some law that >>> edicts any 6-month positive balance has to be sent back to >>> the credit card user. >> >> Really? I've had a positive balance on my corporate Amex for >> years. Can't figure how to get rid of it. >> >>> Oh, and my water bill. Their software >>> can't handle funcking negative amounts; it drops the negative sign. >> >> >> I can believe it. They likely think $0.00 is a positive balance >> due too (queue story about the check written for $0.00 to pay the >> $0.00 balance due, threatened with collections). >> >>> I will have to commit a miracle to convince my mother to pay >>> ahead, though. >> >> I think a payment from an account set up specifically for the >> purpose would be good enough. >> >> -- >> Keith > >Most banks offer visa debit cards tied directly to the account, Until I can set limits, this is 100% unacceptable. > most >utilities will auctomatically debit a bank account via EFT/ACH, or will link >to the bank debit card, banks offer free automatic bill pay so you can set >up recurring fixed payments (I use that for my rent and student loan), and >with direct deposit, I know the cash will be in the account to cover the >bills without my having to worry about it > >I havent written a check in 10 years or more... I dont order checks when I >open a new account ... I do it all electronic, and I have a paper trail >every time I use my card because I keep reciepts (you can still keep a check >register if you like -- probably a good idea actually -- since the card is >electroncally no different than a check -- there must be cash in the account >!!) > >Someone tries to forge a check on my account -- I can show clearly that I >have every check in my possesion that the bank ever issued to me, and that I >have never ordered checks for the account... You can order checks from Current; your strategy isn't sound. There's a bug of omission in it. > makes check fraud kinda obvious >:) And the bank offers fraud protection for misuse of the card so I'm >covered that way Which you have to pay for. Why do I have to pay my month's grocery money to "protect" myself from their lack of coding sanity checks? This is also unacceptable. I'm slowing nudging the banks to include sanity checks of _my_ specs, not theirs. > >Your bank representative should be happy to help you set all this up without >you having to have a computer at home or an internet account -- there have >been a couple of times I've been in a crunch and used the computers at a >bank branch to get online and make a change or a funds transfer -- no sweat >at all -- I bank with washington mutual -- you go into a branch and its not >at all like the usual bank -- just a bunch of computers and a couple of >ATM-like cash dispensing machines -- you talk to the agent -- they key the >data and had you a reciept with a code -- you go to the machine, key the >code and get cash :) > >its all electronic at some point no matter what you do -- might as well go >electronic all the way. I want a human watch dog guarding the bank gates. There is a short list of people you groom and be kind to. Your secretary, your car doctor, and your bank teller. /BAH
From: jmfbahciv on 2 Mar 2007 07:23
In article <es6qts$kgg$4(a)blue.rahul.net>, kensmith(a)green.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote: >In article <es6ggr$8qk_003(a)s985.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, > <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote: >>In article <es45pa$fiu$4(a)blue.rahul.net>, >> kensmith(a)green.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote: >[.....] >>>>If it's a rumor, then the experts believe it, too. >>> >>>That happens all the time. Lots of people get fooled by good sounding >>>stuff that they have never really experimented on. >>> >>This radio station has experts who know the subject. For example, >>and IRS person is on for shows about income taxes. A lawyer for >>estate planning. A doctor for medical subjects. Computer geeks >>for computer usages. And the people are local which means the >>people know each other. This station does a lot of shows >>with the retire auld farts in mind. There still is a Santa >>Claus in some areas of the US. > >If you had google, I'd suggest you google on "N rays" Why are you rejecting the fact that a radio station has experts on their shows to give the local audience the services they need? > >*** begin insert *** >René Prosper Blondlot (1849-1930) was a French physicist who claimed to >have discovered a new type of radiation, shortly after Roentgen had >discovered X-rays. He called it the N-ray, after Nancy, the name of the >town and the university where he lived and worked. Blondlot was trying to >polarize X-rays when he claimed to have discovered his new form of >radiation. Dozens of other scientists confirmed the existence of N-rays in >their own laboratories. However, N-rays don't exist. How could so many >scientists be wrong? They deceived themselves into thinking they were >seeing something when in fact they were not. They saw what they wanted to >see with their instruments, not what was actually there (or, in this case, >what was not there >********** > >This sort of thing goes on all the time. Even experts have biases and >fool themselves all the time. So you are claiming that the tax lawyers on that show, whose expertise is almost exclusively for the aged, does not know anything about social security and the latest changes? Are you claiming, with no evidence since you haven't listened to any of those shows, that the computer geeks who answer questions don't know anything about computer systems? <snip attempt to smoke and mirror the thread> This is a perfect example of your attitude in reading what I write. You start out with the premise that anything I write is 100% wrong and continue from there. The example that started this thread drift was the local problem of crooks "stealing" signatures off checks. I still don't understand exactly how this is done nor how the new kind of pen prevents it. The police are involved and the radio station has given people ways to prevent this from happening. This is what the station does. And everybody listens to them; it's good radio business to cater to your customers. /BAH |