Our old site was a monstrosity in any imaginable aspects. We had the chance to build a new one, from scratch. So what we have now? A broken hurried mess, in a CMS no one is proficient, and the content is just news about the organization. Just that, nothing else.
It appears cute blonde eastern european girl did too, cause she's sitting there with a bottle of milk and cereal
> Now we know it's about 100 large, leaving us wondering: “How did the attack succeed?”
One reason, Hilton says, is that DNS itself can tend to amplify requests from legitimate sources: “For example, the impact of the attack generated a storm of legitimate retry activity as recursive servers attempted to refresh their caches, creating 10-20X normal traffic volume across a large number of IP addresses. When DNS traffic congestion occurs, legitimate retries can further contribute to traffic volume.”
Great, so we've only just realised the entire infrastructure of the internet is prone to self-amplifying congestive collapse?
> We’ve got well over 100,000 mailboxes in our email infrastructure .. Each distribution list had about a quarter of the mailboxes in the company on it (so there were about 13,000 mailboxes on each list).
> Compounding this problem was a bug in the MTA that caused the MTA to crash that occurred only when it received a message with more than 8,000 recipients. But it crashed only AFTER processing up to 8,000 recipients. So 8,000 of the 13,000 recipients of the message would get it and 5,000 wouldn’t. When the MTA was restarted, it would immediately start processing the messages in its queue – and since the messages hadn’t been delivered yet, it would retry to deliver the message, sending to the SAME 8,000 recipients and crashing.
@ThatBrazilianGuy Anyone other than the two most popular parties/people will just about never get voted in under FPTP, because it's seen as "wasting your vote" if you vote for anyone other than the most popular.
If most popular candidate A looks to be about to win and you don't like them, even if you prefer candidate E you might be forced to vote for second-most-popular candidate B because they're "better than A". Voting for E would be throwing away your vote because it would have negligible impact.
Unless everyone else votes for E, but no one will because no one will.
You can put your favourite candidate E as #1. If they don't win, your candidate B can be #2, which will be taken as your vote rather than your vote being tossed away entirely. So you can still vote for E without the risk of not voting for B and letting A win by default.
@Dog for me, it comes down to this: my entire family (self included) is employed on the Government's dime, when it comes down to it; Congress passes an Omnibus Appropriations bill every year that gives the various branches of Government money to operate, which they then pass to my company to support them as contractors
Donald Trump is an anti-establishmentarian, and will likely cut government spending
@tereško Unrepresentative vote. Absolutely no actual plan on implementation. Alienating two thirds of your population. Leading supporters of the winning side quitting government in the immediate aftermath...
I think that America has major issues regarding student loans and health stuff, but they are good about some other stuff, like they're one of the biggest names if not the biggest in countries that are leading technology, also gay rights etc.
currently using a $9.99 app (MacID) to use the Touch ID on my iPhone to unlock my MBP... don't see the value of the touch bar... could use more storage, more RAM and a faster GPU, but what I have runs SWTOR well enough so I don't care