I am trying to setup a canon MF4412 printer on my Arch Linux desktop.
I followed the official guide in setting up a CUPS server/client as well as installing the cndrvcups-lb driver package.
However, my CUPS server is still unable to detect the printer. My best guess is there is a problem with ...
Oh also @AviD how did your friend get on with his procmon type thing? I'm pretty certain I could take on such a challenge these days :) Feel free to use my email if you can't tell me about it here. I never did finish writing my procmon rebuild, but I did make some extensive modifications to a driver at work to get around UAC :)
my best guess right now, is it IS a layer on top of chromium, with very strict process permission controls, and management for it. E.g. Chrome on Windows 7 with UAC (Integrity Levels) with a bit of user experience thrown in.
but I could be wrong.
@TerryChia no, they're very careful not to use that exact term, so they cant be pinned down to something specific.
I predict that in the mid-term future, Skein will be more widely used than Keccak, because there will be some half-informed maverick who will imagine that fitting it in some p2p protocol or OpenBSD login will be a nice political gesture ("we sneer at your government-approved function !").
Can VMWare ESX or ESXi be installed and used inside a virtual machine?
It can be installed inside VMWare Workstation or Server, but then it doesn't work; the main symptoms are:
It runs REALLY slowly.
It lets you create VMs, but when powering up them it gives an error stating "You may not power...
That's great, because vmware is just one hypervisor and they can all co-operate nicely, but what if you have security-based hypervisor product called Squares (for example) and I want to run it on my Tao hypervisor and the two don't talk?
I am connecting to a free public wifi, I want to connect or use other ports like FTP and SSH. What are the possibility to override it?
In order to connect to the internet, They are requiring me to add their proxy on my HTTP and HTTPS settings, under network (Mac OSX).
I've asked them why I can't...
@TerryChia Some people might have objections to the fact that it seems the OP is trying to use a system in a manner which they are not authorized. While this is indeed frowned upon, the community (in Meta) has agreed that "black hat" alone is not a good close reason.
@TerryChia I do like using OSX as a desktop OS, but keep in mind that you're using their environment. If you're accustomed to the "do anything you want if you're willing to put in the effort" mindset you will be in for quite the culture shock.
@jrg I used to feel more strongly about that. The biggest advantage for me to run a compatible desktop OS at work is that I can manage it the same way without much modification, that is managing a Fedora desktop using a puppet tree designed for RHEL requires very few changes.
@jrg These days...do I have ssh available using a reasonable interface? Doesn't so much matter then.
I have http // domain_name (dot0 com
Now, I want https://domain_name.com. I can buy from namecheap or RapidSSL.
I also have created Facebook Apps on this domain. Facebook only supports https. My apps is hosted on the same server where domain_name (dot) com is hosted.
Do I have to buy separate ...
@Gilles That one appears to be already gone (to U&L)
@Gilles I don't like to instill the bitter feeling of rejection on hopeful users who took the effort of suggesting an edit, only to get denied at the last instant by what they feel to be the disdain of a pompous stranger. It is much more exquisite to make fun of them in public, with snarky comments and exuberant pedantry.
@ThomasPornin I was reading back the SHA-3 discussion, and @ThomasPornin mentioned that the NIST was originally looking for a SHA-2 replacement but shifted their goal to a complement for SHA-2. I was wondering why this is, because I'm sure everybody will assume SHA-3 to be an improved version. I can already see the forums full of "Why would you still use SHA-2 when there is SHA-3!"... (PS. This is my first message on a stackexchange chat, hope I got the syntax right)
NIST officially says this: > The only ordering implied in sha2 vs sha3 is when they were designed; we explicitly are *not* telling people they should move from sha2 to sha3. The two standards will coexist.
(now that's my syntax which does not work...)
Anyway, people will assume many things, as is customary with people.
As for reasons for using SHA-2 instead of SHA-3, well, there is a big glaring one known as performance. Especially on small 32-bit CPU, Keccak is substantially slower than SHA-256 (like, twice slower).
@Luc It is from an email from John M. Kelsey, aka "firstname.lastname@example.org". The email was sent to the hash-forum mailing-list (the mailing-list NIST maintains as part of the SHA-3 competition). I don't think it is publicly available.
I mean, it cannot be considered secret in any way, but it is not within reach of Google's bots.
@ScottPack Let's say it take some effort not to be I/O bound, at these speeds. You might get up to 300 MB/s with a good SSD, but mechanical harddisks will be at 100 MB/s or less.
It also takes some effort to find a scenario where such speed is relevant. Normally, when you read data, it is to do something with that data; the "something" could easily be the bottleneck (and usually is).