Live data from Hacker News

Remove “This incident will be reported.” from user warnings

github.com

221–230 of 302 posts

Re: Remove “This incident will be reported.” from user warnings

#221
post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Schools are supposed to be the place where students can break things and break rules. It's part of the education.

learning that if you get caught you're going to be held accountable for your actions is also part of the education. it's not as if they executed OP. telling a kid to stop screwing around is pretty reasonable.

Completely lost on me “babying kids and not showing them that actions can have consequences” is fetishised as soon as computers are involved. I guess because we all grew up doing this stuff.

As an adult that writes software used by a lot of students in a classroom environment, I am glad to see that the spirit it still alive whenever I have a Sentry error come through indicating quite clearly that someone is trying to cheat by dicking around in dev tools. However I’m also certainly going to make the troublemakers shit their pants with a strongly worded console.log().

Re: Remove “This incident will be reported.” from user warnings

#222
post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's the talk command on Unix. We used to do a 'who' to find out who're on the system and 'talk' to them.

also wall(1)

Then there was Jordan Hubbard's infamous "rwall incident" of March 31, 1987.

It was waaaay more than just reported to the local sysadmin, and almost got UCB kicked off the ARPANET.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jordan_Hubbard#rwall_incident

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31822138

Jordan Hubbard wrote: "One of the people who received my message was Dennis Perry, the Inspector General of the ARPAnet (in the Pentagon), and he wasn't exactly pleased. (I hear his Interleaf windows got scribbled on)"

>Here's the explanation he sent to hackers_guild, and some replies from old net boys like Milo Medin (who said the program manager of the Arpanet in the Information Science and Technology Office of DARPA Dennis G. Perry said they would kick UCB off the Arpanet if it ever happened again), Mark Crispin (who presciently proposed cash rewards for discovering and disclosing security bugs), and Dennis G. Perry himself:

(See https://www.ndia.org/events/2021/8/18/1341---swif-2021/speak... if you don't know who Milo Medin is!)

Milo S. Medin replied:

>Actually, Dennis Perry is the head of DARPA/IPTO, not a pencil pusher in the IG's office. IPTO is the part of DARPA that deals with all CS issues (including funding for ARPANET, BSD, MACH, SDINET, etc...). Calling him part of the IG's office on the TCP/IP list probably didn't win you any favors. Coincidentally I was at a meeting at the Pentagon last Thursday that Dennis was at, along with Mike Corrigan (the man at DoD/OSD responsible for all of DDN), and a couple other such types discussing Internet management issues, when your little incident came up. Dennis was absolutely livid, and I recall him saying something about shutting off UCB's PSN ports if this happened again. There were also reports about the DCA management types really putting on the heat about turning on Mailbridge filtering now and not after the buttergates are deployed. I don't know if Mike St. Johns and company can hold them off much longer. Sigh... Mike Corrigan mentioned that this was the sort of thing that gets networks shut off. You really pissed off the wrong people with this move!

>Dennis also called up some VP at SUN and demanded this hole be patched in the next release. People generally pay attention to such people.

Jordan's infamous rwall incident is the kind of thing that might have triggered the rumored "explosive bolts" the Defense Communication Agency was once talking about installing, that would violently separate the MILNET and ARPANET in case of national emergency.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34171294

>DCA must have the ability to partition the ARPANET and MILNET in case of an "emergency", and having non-DCA controlled paths between the nets prevents that. There was talk some time ago about putting explosive bolts in the mailbridges that would be triggered by destruct packets... That idea didn't get far though...

Re: Remove “This incident will be reported.” from user warnings

#223
post #12

I was always disappointed it never summoned some grumpy graybeard unix admin from a dark server room basement to give me a chiding lecture.

Just because we’ve never seen him doesn’t mean he hasn’t at some point quietly summoned a curse on us

I am 100% sure I had some petty manually-initiated retaliatory action taken against me by a sysadmin at my university. I never heard a peep through any channel, official or otherwise.

Re: Remove “This incident will be reported.” from user warnings

#224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/byu.uug/ This user group was already in place by the time Linux came along, so you had the UUG doing Red Hat boxed set giveaways and such. There was a ton of excitement about Linux and not as much about Unix at that point. Then a bit more proper-Unix excitement when OS X came out. The other ones are correct.

OMFG. The currently-active BYU LUG hosts their site on motherfucking Facebook. How the mighty have fallen.

I got my uni CS club going on IRC. I’ve recently discovered that they’re now on Discord. I get it, like, IRC is increasingly undesirable these days, especially without a bouncer. It still hurt though.

Re: Remove “This incident will be reported.” from user warnings

#226
post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's the talk command on Unix. We used to do a 'who' to find out who're on the system and 'talk' to them.

I remember that one of the financial banking software we were using had an internal chat that was basically using "write"(?) underneath to send messages to another users terminal (it was running on Sun Solaris I think).

It always annoyed me that the Unix terminal subsystem is too dumb to handle multiple writers to the same terminal at once without them potentially corrupting each other’s output. There are some techniques to reduce the incidence of this but none of them are foolproof, whereas a better design could be.

Maybe that was too hard when people used to use hardcopy terminals (actual ttys), although even there it possibly could have done better than it actually does.

But certainly by the time people had softcopy terminals with cursor positioning (like the DEC VT series and its emulators), a better experience could have been possible. For example, what if the functionality of curses was actually in the tty driver, so if another process wrote to the terminal it would appear as a new window, which could then be dismissed without altering the output of the underlying program? Or, to avoid putting too much in kernel space, the tty subsystem could live in a user-space daemon (possibly one process per terminal), and then applications would talk to it over IPC

Re: Remove “This incident will be reported.” from user warnings

#228
post #12

I was always disappointed it never summoned some grumpy graybeard unix admin from a dark server room basement to give me a chiding lecture.

Can’t believe nobody has reposted this yet: https://xkcd.com/838

it's in the github issue itself :)

Re: Remove “This incident will be reported.” from user warnings

#229

Alright, did I tell my college sysadmin story already? This is the perfect place to drop it. 1990, freshman in college, Pascal class on AT&T Unix SVR3 3B2 cluster named "earth", "wind", and "fire". We'd just learned our way around "vi" and how to "uvapc" our Pascal source into a.out. I discovered anonymous ftp, and "make", and I quickly rose to become the gaming king of Pascal class. I had ularn, nethack, megs and me…

My similar story: I wrote a script that tries all the words from a spellchecker I found as passwords for each user (a really naive dictionary attack). The angry admin did came as apparently each wrong attempt generated a beep on some station in their room (these were dos times iirc and the admins were just high school kids).

Re: Remove “This incident will be reported.” from user warnings

#230
post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does this kind of sysadmin still exists? (or do they even still have the freedom to be so kind?) I cannot really imagine that happening today, at least not in "professional" context.

It still happens, a fellow student and friend of mine got this response ('installed it for you') about two years ago at Radboud University Nijmegen after entering `sudo apt install nasm`

Glad to hear that. I really like that style and attitude. It shows competence, humor and willingness to help.

My admins were sadly mostly of the grumpy type, who did not like change, or initiative to solve peoples problem.

Post reply on HN