This is true - I forgot that XP lets a limited user do that. If a user has saved stuff to C:\, then you'll need to hunt for files and/or bludgeon them with a laptop dock. — MDMarra2 mins ago
@MDMarra Whatever's old, cheap, and unused. That way you can smack the user over the head until the dock breaks, and the bosses complain less than if you break one that's actually useful for docking a laptop.
My wife had very bad food poisoning last night, and there hasn't been a day since I got back from winter shortage duty that everyone in my house has been healthy
@NathanC Yeah, I tried that with SCCM 2012 (R0/R1). Effing nightmare. I'm told that SCCM 2012 R2 actually installs properly, but still don't want to take the chance of going through that clusterfuck again.
So, happy to let someone else volunteer for it. :)
@HopelessN00b I was able to get it installed fine in a test lab. I then thought it was a great idea to join it to the main domain...SCCM didn't like me too much and exploded
@NathanC My experience was even worse. Couldn't even get it to connect with WSUS in the test lab without a couple days of tracing obscure error messages and generally screaming at my PC like a crazy man. Got even worse once I got it out of the test lab.
Reading Tim's post it looks like it really will happen.. Hopefully the SO related noise going elsewhere will mean that people and in particular employees will get a chance to answer questions in a broader less SOcentric manner.
Gah, consultants. Now I have to learn how name suffix routing works with forest trusts and a forest named the same as DNS root. I should have just become a hooker.
@HopelessN00b And yet they get lit up by 3rd party "lobbyists" every time they end up "fixing" things. Host firewall vendors got all pissy when Windows Firewall was added. Defender pissed off both McAfee and Symantec. etc.
@HopelessN00b and I'm curious how you will end up dealing with your name suffix routing issues with your fqdn conflicts. Did you guys come up with a solution?
@TheCleaner Working on it right now. I bitched about it chat about 30 seconds after I realized that was the cause of some cross-forest authentication issues I noticed earlier in the week.
I'm hoping it's as simple as adding an exclusion for *.corp.comanyname.com in the companyname.com forest and enabling routing on corp.companyname.com ... but I have some reading and testing to do before I'll be sure.
@TheCleaner Seems to have worked, actually. Well, it let me add the exclusion and enable routing, anyway. Guess I'm not yet sure if it actually works or not.
I have been pulling my hair for the past weeks about how to package a couple of services together. Say I would like to sell domains, so I have a domain reseller account from any of the providers.
I would like to sell hosting with the domains but in the hosting service I would like to have a part...
I guess we could get by with a one-way... but we've got two ways in place as of now. In the long run, the mal-named forests will be depopulated and banished to /dev/null/, but it will be useful in the meantime to have one set of creds that work in all forests.
@HopelessN00b agreed. I started to feel bad for the guy for putting in the time and for his final thoughts about hoping it didn't get closed. It's subjective...but maybe it can be salvaged to be a decent subjective question. I was going to look at the canonicals and see if one fits as well.
@TheCleaner «You ended with "please don't close this question"» should be a valid close reason.
Oh god
"seems attractive because it's exciting from DevOps perspective. I was thinking of Having one or 2 Dedicated servers and put OpenStack on it so that, if needs be add more servers for scalability. I have absolutely no experience with Openstack but I manage a dozen of Ubuntu dedicated servers and almost same numbers of AWS EC2 instances on a daily basis."
We have an exchange server which uses Forefront TMG.I consumed the Exchange Web Service ,it worked fine in my one of the cloud server without Forefront TMG(setup in my local machine).But in my mechine with firewall, i cannot access the webservice "https://mail.domain.com/EWS/Exchange.asmx". I get...
Not to sounds anti-ESL users, but the more questions I read on the main lately, the more I think there should be a "reading your question gave me a headache" VTC reason.
@ChrisS Yes, that. Even better than my idea, as I've been known to get headaches from the seeing the string cPanel in a question. Or wait, is that maybe a reason that my idea's better? :)
I want to create a backup internet connection for my office and have bought a wireless 4g router Huawei b593.
What I want to achieve is creating a "secondary" gateway address so that if the default dsl line goes down everyone could continue working just changing the gateway ip from 192.168.135.1...
On this question, could you do what he wanted by setting a route to the wireless router to a higher metric? Or would the clients keep trying the preferred route, even if the wired connection went down?
@TheCleaner @HopelessN00b yeah, it's not that we want to be mean about ESL problems, but yeah if a question is unreadable then why it is matters less than the fact that it is.
Questions must demonstrate a minimal understanding of the problem being solved. Try including attempted solutions, why they didn't work, and the expected results. See How can I ask better questions on Server Fault? for further guidance. -- is "why they didn't work" really applicable? I mean, if I were the OP I'd say "if I knew WHY it didn't work I wouldn't be posting the question!"
@Dan Weight is not as easy as a function of calories in/calories out. Going to the gym is not a guaranteed way to lose weight. There are people who are very fit and still considered obese based on their weight. There are thin people who are very unhealthy. Using "weight" as a proxy measurement for health is worse than useless, and it has very real negative health outcomes for a lot of people.
@Dan Also the cartoon alien and the horrible font.
@JennyD I agree to a point - there are very few people who are "very fit and considered obese" - and those that are will be people like rugby players. I'm marginally overweight and reasonably fit, but that's because I eat too much. I could lose weight if I tried harder
I accept there are medical reasons for some, but for most it's a simple case of eating too much with a sedentary lifestyle
I also disagree that using weight is worse than useless - things like waist/height ratios may be better, but ultimately, we know that being overweight is bad for most people
@JennyD Not that you're wrong (or that there isn't plenty of scientific data to back up your position), but good luck with that fight. Easier to just accept that the majority of people are wrong, and on a probably-related-note, the majority of people are stupid.
@Dan Since the BMI doesn't work for people outside average height, you will find people who are considered obese simply for being tall. Also, I personally know one woman who was in the "obese" range before having a breast reduction surgery, bringing her down to "overweight". She also regularly exercised 5 horses a day, including cleaning their stalls and other stable duties. She was by no means unfit.
@Dan Since the 1950's, the average weight of lab animals has also increased by 50%. Is this because lab animals are also leading a sedentary lifestyle, and not hitting the gym enough? :/
BMI is one simple (and flawed) method of looking at weight and height - it's designed for population data and not individuals, but it may serve as a simple indicator for the majority
@JennyD You can be obese without needing to look at BMI.
It is a lot more complicated than calories in vs exercise, regarldess of how inconvenient it is for everyone who thinks they can fix obesity by banning large sodas.
@Dan Yes - but it counts with a square instead of a cube. We're not two-dimensional, we're three-dimensional, so the measure is increasingly inaccurate the further away from the standard height you get.
@HopelessN00b More complicated yes, but for the majority reducing their intake and exercising will reduce their weight. It's primarily a societal problem
All this talk about BMI and weight loss makes me think of the articles about the Biggest Loser winner last night that everyone is calling anorexic now.
@Dan The point is that BMI is a statistical tool (originally used for demographic data about Dutch people, in the 19th century, IIRC), and doesn't actually have any relevance regarding a person's health, or fat content.
@ChrisS I think I'm better than most. Pretty much everyone will speak it well enough to be understood, but not this well. But I read a lot in English, and I used to have an English girlfriend. My accent is a lot worse since we broke up and I stopped going to England that frequently.
@Dan You said it could serve as a simple indicator for the majority... but that's not really the case. %body fat (which is easily approximated these days) would be the much better measurement to use.
Though mine do measure it, and in terms of "slightly overweight", all the indicators get me to about the same place (BMI, body fat index and waist/height)
@HopelessN00b Okay, how about "most people don't have a body fat tool. And the domestic ones are probably not very accurate anyway (This bit is guesswork, but the one at the gym looked complex and expensive)
I lost 50 something pounds last year, now I've gained ~10 back that I seem to fluctuate between. First time around was just changing my eating habits - I think it's time for exercise now.
@Dan Well, in talking about a general indicator that's good enough for most people, diagnostic-level accuracy isn't exactly needed. And considering that you can pick up a scale that measures it for $40, I don't see any reason to use BMI at all, let alone as some kind of gold-standard.
@RobM I have no motivation to lose weight. I do, however have a motivation to go to the gym, which is that my riding trainer expressed the sentiment that I would be more likely to not fall off if I had any muscles at all in my back and abdomen...
@Dan True as that may be, it's also the most commonly used one, and one that's even commonly used by health care professionals... which is pretty appalling. Which seems to bring us full circle to me comment about the majority of people being wrong, and also stupid.
I recently found out I have fat on my liver which looks like the early stages of an alcoholic's liver - but it's not from alcohol. So that's why I'm trying to lose more weight.
@RobM Can't remember if I said here, but my GPS watch reckons I've burnt some 60000 calories last year. Imagine how much weight I'd have put on if I didn't!
@Dan There's a correlation, sure, but I don't think it's strong enough to warrant obsessing over it, or even improving the scales. You're not going to look at your BMI and make a sudden realization that you've been working out the wrong way and eating all the wrong things this whole time, and conversely you don't need it realize you're a fat and unhealthy. I know I'm a fat fucker without checking my BMI.
But then, again, still not worth obsessing over or improving the calculation. If somebody needs a doctor to point at a chart and say "Look, you're fat!" then the accuracy of the chart doesn't matter all that much.
@HopelessN00b Most would consider that a reasonable motivation - that and I really hated the realisation I'd actually gone from "podgy" to actually looking fat
@Dan It depends, actually. On the degree of excess weight, and other underlying factors, like the person's normal blood pressure, cardiac health and metabolic rate, for a few factors.
@JennyD And I'm sure a healthy in-between weight that most should be aiming for. Getting hit by a car is probably better than being hit by a train, but staying on the pavement is even better
I really have no idea what points you're trying to prove
We've gotten so little snow this year there's concerns about how the dam is going to run this summer. (Which has a large impact on the economy here, since our PUD is a huge company and we sell a lot of power to California...)
@Dan I have stated the point repeatedly - that weight is not a good proxy measurement for health. I could add that what is considered a normal healthy weight has changed a lot in the past few decades and that there is research showing that what is now considered overweight may in fact not be. This in no way invalidates that most people in our society would benefit from getting more exercise - whether or not they lose weight in the process.
I'm not saying that you are wrong to want to lose weight. I'm just saying that our society's tendency to conflate weight with health is wrong and it is damaging to actual people and it makes me tired.
@dan makes a fair point. It's like the people who tell themselves, and you, "a glass of wine a day is good for you" while drinking a bottle and a half of it a day.
@JennyD I think we all know a 'fat' person when we see them or ourselves. I know my belly has too much fat on it, but I'll save you the horror of proving it. I also know that it's a bad thing, and the only way to reduce that would be to reduce my weight
Which is why people need to do more cardio and the like - no amount of situps is going to help me there
@Dan But none of those say anything about actual health - they are proxy measurements and may or may not be good ones. I would prefer a focus on how healthy people actually are, e.g. their bloodwork stats, if they can walk up stairs without getting out of breath, etc. A focus on that would be much more useful and probably work better, too.
@Dan I don't say anything about whether you're fat or not. I'm not saying that people are not fat. I am saying that having this idea that exercise and fatness are mutually exclusive is wrong and is damaging.
@RobM I don't see the problem with that. My mental health might even require me to drink a fifth and a half of scotch a day. Well, at least a fifth. I'm willing to admit that the extra half-a-fifth is mostly for my amusement.
@Tanner Maybe. The important thing to remember is that it would be inappropriate (and probably a firing-offense) to trick the user into shocking themselves with the computer PSU.
@Dan Who will, like you, tell them to eat less and exercise more. Because a lot of doctors too believe that if people follow that advice it will always result in a weight loss. Which is not true.
And, worst of all, because of the assumption that anyone can lose weight by eating right and exercising, there's nothing medical science can really do for people who are fat and can't lose weight through no fault of their own.
@Dan You are also chucking a scenario in - yours is "if you just eat less and exercise you will lose weight". And several people here have said that this is not necessarily true.
@cole My weight has always reacted to what hormonal treatment I've been on for my endometriosis. When I was a teenager I was severely underweight. It wasn't until they put me on testosterone for my endo that I was able to gain weight - and I'd been doing stuff like drinking cream straight from the bottle, things like that, to gain some weight...