Randall Rose wrote:
> I am looking to find a printer for Ubuntu, ideally one with absolutely no
> wireless (privacy is important). Thoughts?
A Brother laser, with duplex, BRScript/3 and an ethernet port.
All three together are important.
If it happens to also come with a wifi NIC, that can be
Kent Borg wrote:
> The most intriguing btrfs, zfs, etc., feature that I have never played with
> is the ability to do snapshots. But that is also a scary feature, allowing
> me to have parallel universes, each complete in itself? And what happens
> when I get confused (or for some other reason) st
Kent Borg wrote:
> much RAM, but I ran into problems with 512 MiB when just setting things up:
> running emacs, installing packages… And why does systemd think it needs to
> be a whole damn OS in and of itself? It is a pig. And it is complex making,
> it a security risk. (Yes, I blame systemd for
Rich Pieri wrote:
> I almost agree on a technicality: ZFS was not designed for a "general
> audience". It was designed to be the last word -- or at least the last
> letter, "Z" -- in enterprise scalability and performance. But it just so
> happens to be really good at smaller scales, too. Better t
Kent Borg wrote:
> > Everything should come up again just fine on a non-desktop
> > system. Things can be arranged on a desktop system but are
> > somewhat more involved.
>
> I wonder how much this would break my MATE desktop…
It's reversible if you can't make it work, but I suspect that
adding
ma...@mohawksoft.com wrote:
> I have a RPI5 running ZFS, PostgreSQL, a DLNA server, and a full
> development stack that compiles just about any code I have laying around.
>
> These things chave 8 gigs of RAM, 4 CPUs, use 15 watts of power, and cost
> less than a video card. My desktop is consider
Kent Borg wrote:
> My Dell XPS 13 7390 is getting old creaky, and at nearly 4-years, it isn't
> new, but how annoying, it has been a nice machine.
>
>
> Grrr. I don't want to spend a bunch of money on a new computer right now.
> But the battery is supposedly only 57% of what it used to be. The t
Daniel M Gessel wrote:
> Is it commercial, closed source anti-virus software?
Yes.
Probably more respected a dozen years ago.
-dsr-
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@driftwood.blu.org
https://driftwood.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Kent Borg wrote:
> I'm thinking I need to set up a VPN server that tunnels through TLS. Not
> going to be a perfect disguise, but I bet mostly good enough. Donno.
>
>
> (Suggestions of the easiest way to do that?)
If they don't block UDP, wireguard on any non-default port is a
good idea.
TCP o
Rich Pieri wrote:
> While the CrowdStrike (not to be confused with CloudFlare) fiasco
> Friday affected millions of Windows computers, Linux is not immune to
> such an event. I'm not familiar with CrowdStrike Falcon, but my
> employer uses competing PaloAlto Networks' Cortex XDR. It's a similar
>
j...@gasek.net wrote:
>
> HIRE GOOD PEOPLE.
> TEST YOUR CODE.
> DEPLOY TO A SANDBOX FIRST.
> DOUBLE CHECK STAGING FILES.
> CROSSTRAIN YOUR STAFF.
> CHECK YOUR WORK
>
> Right now the entire country is re-evaluating how they deploy patches.
>
> Shame on you if you accept and deploy a vendors
Kent Borg wrote:
> Anyway, finally to the point.
>
> What is going on in this short excerpt (out of a very long e-mail of such
> stuff):
>
> > From 103.203.58.1 - 1 packet to tcp(8001)
> > From 103.224.217.31 - 1 packet to tcp(23)
> > From 103.229.127.36 - 1 packet to udp(1434)
> >
Kent Borg wrote:
> On 8/1/24 10:29, Dan Ritter wrote:
> > Zero Trust means that you don't*grant* access based on the
> > sender's IP.
>
> I like my version better: Design and build your system so that every node is
> secure enough to sit on today's open i
Daniel M Gessel wrote:
> Firewalls seem like an ideal solution: a trusted network inside an effective
> firewall is free from the (not insignificant) overhead of security.
>
> But firewalls aren't completely effective and are only one tool that we all
> use on a daily basis.
The biggest problem
Daniel M Gessel wrote:
> On 2024-08-06 00:31, Bill Bogstad wrote:
> > We would have a whole lot fewer moles to whack if we changed our tools.
>
> In some cases a 5% performance hit is huge - offering up "our programmers
> make mistakes" as a justification is a non-starter.
Remember that:
- virt
Daniel M Gessel wrote:
>
>
> On 2024-08-06 11:47, Dan Ritter wrote:
> > Daniel M Gessel wrote:
> > > On 2024-08-06 00:31, Bill Bogstad wrote:
> > > > We would have a whole lot fewer moles to whack if we changed our tools.
> > > In some cases a
Steve Litt wrote:
> Dan Ritter said on Tue, 6 Aug 2024 13:03:04 -0400
>
> >The rise of virtual machines and containers is an admission of
> >systemic failure: people gave up on managing dependencies in a
> >sensible manner. Rather than have a deployment system which
>
17 matches
Mail list logo
