Sysadmins
-
First they allow only output trafics.
Then only certain ports.
Then only named ports.
Then only common ports.
Then only web ports.
Then only http.
Then they switch off the firewall.
-
That "million dollar screenshot" and others like it is one of the most
idiotic ideas since support for the <blink> tag was discontinued.
Seriously, people, this isn't 1995. Get your moronic site off the Web and save the world's bandwidth.
-
@trollable said:
First they allow only output trafics.
Then only certain ports.
Then only named ports.
Then only common ports.
Then only web ports.
Then only http.
Then they switch off the firewall.
Judging from your expert use of jargon, I'd say you'd make a great
sysadmin. You could do a much better job than all those bad ones out
there you don't like.
@trollable said:[ web site in sig ]
LOL! (And I don't use that term lightly.) That's the funniest stupid idea I've seen all week. Thanks.
-
@trollable said:
Then only http.
Then they switch off the firewall.
You forgot the most important stages between those two:
Then they do content filtering on the HTTP traffic
When this leads to the CEO not anymore being able to look at his daughter's team's webpage on www.essexcountygirlsfootballleague.co.uk, then the firewall gets switched off.
-
@rogthefrog said:
That "million dollar screenshot" and others like it is one of the most idiotic ideas since support for the <BLINK>tag was discontinued.
</BLINK>
Seriously, people, this isn't 1995. Get your moronic site off the Web and save the world's bandwidth.<BLINK></BLINK>
<BLINK>.....doesn't that mean you think support for the BLINK tag should still exist? If this wasn't an error on my part or yours, I would love to hear why you love BLINK tags so much. I do assume though, this was just a mistake.</BLINK>
-
@ItsAllGeekToMe said:
@rogthefrog said:
That "million dollar screenshot" and others like it is one of the most idiotic ideas since support for the <blink>tag was discontinued.
</blink>
Seriously, people, this isn't 1995. Get your moronic site off the Web and save the world's bandwidth.<blink></blink>
<blink>.....doesn't that mean you think support for the BLINK tag should still exist? If this wasn't an error on my part or yours, I would love to hear why you love BLINK tags so much. I do assume though, this was just a mistake.</blink>
Why is it a mistake? Why do you think this means anything other than "Since 2002" or similar?
While the expression can mean "Since <name an even more extreme event>" there's no grammatical reason why it has to be anything other than a cutoff date, and in my experience both forms are used interchangably.
-
@brazzy said:
You forgot the most important stages between those two:
Then they do content filtering on the HTTP traffic
When this leads to the CEO not anymore being able to look at his daughter's team's webpage on www.essexcountygirlsfootballleague.co.uk, then the firewall gets switched off.
You're right, however, where I am, content filtering would require too much work:
new software (so new budget)
new hardware (because the FW runs on an IPX :S )
installation, test
lots of meetings to define what should be filtered, ...
So the lazy sysadmin will skip this step.
Why do I complain? I still have http and should be happy :D
-
@foxyshadis said:
Why is it a mistake? Why do you think this means anything other than "Since 2002" or similar?
While the expression can mean "Since <name an="" even="" more="" extreme="" event="">"
there's no grammatical reason why it has to be anything other than a
cutoff date, and in my experience both forms are used interchangably.
Eh? You're right - there is no grammatical reason. Your statement could
still be true (factually / gramatically) even if ending support
for the Blink tag was a really stupid idea - by being the most
idiotic idea after that event.
But we all have a duty </name>not <name an="" even="" more="" extreme="" event="">to
imply things we know to be false when we talk. When we lie, we
state/imply things we know to be false. If I say, "This is the coldest
winter since 1962", I imply that the winter of 1962 was colder than
this one. If it wasn't, and it's just that this winter is colder than
the winters of 1963 onwards, I have misled the person into believing
something false. Otherwise known as lying.
So, either you were lying to us or you think ending support for the
blink tag was a really doozy of an idea. Or you just plain made a
mistake and can't admit it.
</name>
-
"That million dollar screenshot and others like it is one of the most
idiotic ideas since support for the BLINK tag was discontinued."
rephrases as:
"That million dollar screenshot and others like it is one of the most
idiotic ideas since the discontinuation of support for the BLINK tag."
This sentence clearly states that discontiuning the BLINK tag was a stupid idea, and that BLINK tags are good.
Shouldn't programmers be more aware of syntax, grammar and semantics?
-
@murphyman said:
@foxyshadis said:
Why is it a mistake? Why do you think this means anything other than "Since 2002" or similar?
While the expression can mean "Since <name an="" even="" more="" extreme="" event="">"
there's no grammatical reason why it has to be anything other than a
cutoff date, and in my experience both forms are used interchangably.
Eh? You're right - there is no grammatical reason. Your statement could
still be true (factually / gramatically) even if ending support
for the Blink tag was a really stupid idea - by being the most
idiotic idea after that event.
But we all have a duty </name>not <name an="" even="" more="" extreme="" event="">to
imply things we know to be false when we talk. When we lie, we
state/imply things we know to be false. If I say, "This is the coldest
winter since 1962", I imply that the winter of 1962 was colder than
this one. If it wasn't, and it's just that this winter is colder than
the winters of 1963 onwards, I have misled the person into believing
something false. Otherwise known as lying.
So, either you were lying to us or you think ending support for the
blink tag was a really doozy of an idea. Or you just plain made a
mistake and can't admit it.
</name>
I am not the original poster, I'm not sure how you could have come to that conclusion. I have an avatar for a reason. That's not to say it wasn't an accident of grammer on the original poster's part, it may have been.
I reiterate:
and in my experience both forms are used interchangably.
Maybe in yours they aren't, certainly that is the more common meaning, but why you felt you had to explain to me what I already said I understood is lost on me.
-
I'd have to agree there is a 'loose' interperetation of the 'worst
since then' expression, basically meant to convey nothing more than
'very bad', which renders the 'since X' comparisin somewhat useless.
Language: the greatest idea since spoken bread.
-
@dhromed said:
"That million dollar screenshot and others like it is one of the most idiotic ideas since support for the BLINK tag was discontinued."
rephrases as:
"That million dollar screenshot and others like it is one of the most idiotic ideas since the discontinuation of support for the BLINK tag."
This sentence clearly states that discontiuning the BLINK tag was a stupid idea, and that BLINK tags are good.
Shouldn't programmers be more aware of syntax, grammar and semantics?How about:
"That million dollar screenshot and others like it is one of the most idiotic ideas since the beginning of time."
I think we can all agree on this one (except, perhaps, for trollable).
I remember a quote from back when we programmed with styluses on wax tablets that went something like: "Make it possible for programmers to write programs in English and you will discover that programmers can't write in English." Programmers are profoundly aware of syntax, grammar and semantics when they're programming and when they're flaming each other - other than that, forget it.
