Search results

This is a company that I used to like. Once upon a time, when browsers on phones sucked, it served a useful purpose. I even paid for the pro version. But then they started screwing around with the UI to put everything into a curated feed (that they could insert ads into). It got buggier...

I can't see that world, because the app vendors try to degrade the app-free experience to push people to the app, where lock-in is easier.

Conveniences like extra ads that apparently pay the site owner almost nothing! And a buggy crashy app with a bad UI! I despise sites that push you into using a stupid app instead of just working with a browser.

I don't understand what you're asking. Do you think they implemented a unidirectional 10Gbps link?

The difference is that the core controller chip is probably not a fake--it's just too much effort to clone it. They may be parts that failed QC, or they might be unauthorized runs, or they might be 100% ok, but at any rate they probably are the same as the chip on a genuine card. The rest of the...

The question isn't whether the network controller chip operates as an intel network controller, it's whether all the other components on the (uncertified) board are to spec.

There's no way a $59 i350 on alibaba is genuine. In the best case you won't know the difference. In the bad case it might not work or it might be flaky. In the worst case, it'll catch fire and/or kill the motherboard.

If there are several slots so it's NBD to add 10gbe, then ok I guess. But on a system with limited expansion that should last at least 5 years, it's hard to see 1gbe being sufficient for the long haul.

1980 called, they want their computer magazine back. Seriously, you're overthinking this.

Most of which seems to be for components that aren't there. I'd guess they reuse the same board for multiple products.

whatever's cheap & available

If you're lucky. The pfsense/freebsd drivers for realtek cards are just bad. You may have better luck with the drivers distributed by realtek.

I'm pretty sure I specifically said that a compromised client could access files for which valid user tokens exist on the client--but that's entirely different from "if your NFS is exported read/write then a compromised client can do anything with it". If the permissions are based on per-machine...

No, the machine needs to be authorized to mount the NFS+kerberos export, but access to specific files is controlled on a per-user basis, and a user ticket with appropriate authorization is required for each file access; compromising a host in this scenario only compromises files that are...

In my opinion, the real issue is that people have gotten into the habit of using "intel NIC" as shorthand for "not absolute bottom barrel components". The issues with RTL gear in recent years isn't the chipset, it's a crappy voltage controller or dodgy capacitor or PoS PHY or somesuch, because...

How does that help? In most cases I've seen the FC security is based on restricting access to specific WWNs...which are spoofable. It is possible to lock things to particular switch ports, but the management overhead involved is significant and (again, IME) rarely implemented. It's also possible...

In classic NFS the permissions are enforced client side. (In fact, if on an OS that doesn't enforce privileged ports, a regular user can connect to the NFS server directly and access anything!) If you use kerberos authentication, then the file access is controlled server-side via the rights of...

Intel scalable is so un-compelling that we're not really even looking at it for replacements. Stuff that used to get 2s E5 now gets 1s epyc, but even with those the ROI on ripping out working E5s just isn't there. (Especially since memory prices still haven't come all the way back down--the cost...

This is true of all ad networks, it's why I use an ad blocker and noscript. I get the economic argument, but until the ad networks police themselves (not holding my breath) it's stupid to trust them.

Because English isn't a top-to-bottom language and because the reader lacks the context to properly understand a reply, forcing them to waste time reading through a message to find the context then rereading the message (now with context) to understand it. Why isn't it? It is not generally...