sonofsanta

Honestly... timings won't make that much difference except to benchmarking. The slower timings there are offset by the higher speed, and overall it pretty much balances out. Avoid the slowest of slow RAM, but no point in spending hundreds on silly kits. Here's an article that goes into it in more depth: Conclusions: Do you need a 3000 MHz C12 memory kit? - Memory Scaling on Haswell CPU, IGP and dGPU: DDR3-1333 to DDR3-3000 Tested with G.Skill

Dan Carlin's Hardcore History--massively entertaining amatuer historian, often four hours long when he gets too carried away, only come out every three months or so because they're so exhaustively researched. The Long Now Foundation--kind of like TED talks for futurism. Often some very cool info and thinking in there. PodCastle--fantasy fiction. I concede I may be biased on this one, seeing as I'm an associate editor and they keep buying my stories (I have two forthcoming, sometime, eventually)

Obviously the best suggestion:

Oh for f... so yes, under Administration > Site Configuration > Sites > [site server] > Configure Site Components > Software Update Point > Supersedence Rules, the Supersedence Behaviour ("immediately expire a superseded software update") does not act in the way it does elsewhere, which is to say that usually expired updates are simply marked as expired but still listed, and it's just one more field to search on. No, expired here means "I'll not bother getting it at all" So having changed this setting that has not been any trouble whatsoever for 5 bloomin' years, including month 1 of this ridiculous new update scheme, I can now see both flavours of rollup. I'll leave this month's as is--gives me a baseline, I suppose--and go back to excluding "Quality Rollup" from my ADR for next month. Whole thing is bloody ridiculous, especially off the back of a year of regularly broken updates. What were they thinking?

The new policy option--Package Point and print - Approved servers, which wasn't there in July--seems to have fixed it for me, with no changes needed on the print server or with the custom (unsigned) drivers. Would have been nice to have had the option there when MS initially pushed the patch out, but at least it's sorted now... Weirdly, after doing the October/November rollups, my workstations still think they need kb3170455, when I thought it (or a superseding update) was in the recent rollups--but printers seem to work with all the updates installed, anyway, so I'm just happy to be done with this job at last.

It's not that; All Software Updates still shows expired updates there (there's 3 or 4 for SCEP in any given day, after all). And it pulled through October's update. It's not being filtered out or not being ignored by the ADR; it's not showing it at all after syncing

Yeah, I have those two, but I don't have the November 2016 Security Only Rollup (KB3197867) that @DaveAshworth listed above. 3197868 is the one that supersedes it, and I'm deploying that in lieu of 3197867, but I'd rather the former, as it's the smaller package to deploy. I'm not touching 3197869 as that's essentially "December 2016 but only half-baked and poorly tested". I'll wait until it's actually ready next month

I'm not even seeing the November Security Only Quality Update in SCCM--only the Security Monthly Quality Rollup (and the Preview updates, which I'm ignoring; I don't trust MS updates at the moment, too many foul ups this year. I'll wait till full release, thanks). I saw the October Security Only update, so no idea why I'm not seeing the November one.

Who Will Command The Robot Armies? Transcript of a talk that's a fascinating, worrying and often hilarious look at how automation is leading us down a blind alley because no-one is taking responsibility for this. Worth reading for the Internet of Things section if nothing else, which is thoroughly tragicomic, but the whole thing is enlightening.

In doing some testing for setting a new file server up, I realised all this wasn't actually firing properly--it wasn't ever blocking the shares on the remote servers, only the server that was triggered by FSRM. Here's how I've fixed it: 1) servers didn't have permission to connect to the other servers to invoke-command On each file server, in Powershell, run Set-PSSessionConfiguration -ShowSecurityDescriptorUI -Name Microsoft.PowerShell and tap enter to confirm that yes, you want to perform this action. That pops up a permissions window, similar to any folder security tab. Click Add, click Object Types and tick Computers, then type out the object names of the other servers e.g. the ones that will connect to this one to shut down the shares. Give them Execute(Invoke) permissions. Click OK, then tap enter in the PS to restart WinRM. (Source: top answer here) 2) invoke-command credentials weren't being passed properly This is related to @halbaradkenafin's point in his original post about the secure password file: For encrypting the password in another file then run the following from a PowerShell prompt while logged in as the user who the script will run as I'd taken that to mean I should run it as the admin account whose credentials were being passed, but it actually means as the account that will run the script, as detailed in the FSRM template--so Local System. So you need to run the password encrypting command in a PowerShell window running as LocalSystem, which is a bit of a faff; you have to do it using psexec. Basically, from a command window in your psexec folder, run psexec -i -s Powershell.exe and in the PowerShell window that opens, run whoami to confirm it's running as nt authority\system Run the code to create the secure password file in that window and it should then be fine.

Hammers on Bone by Cassandra Khaw. Lovecraftian novella about monsters in Croydon, about poverty and abuse and power and violence, as told by a monster inhabiting the body & role of an American film-noir PI. Depressing as all get out, but brilliant.

From Twitter: I hope Elon Musk never gets in a scandal, because Elongate would be sure to get really drawn out.

I'm not that daft you know what I meant! I think people are maybe seeing it as a cash in and not "real", because it's not in the main storyline... but I reckon it's going to be much more interesting and inventive because it's not in the main storyline, so it can do things differently, with less pressure that they're screwing the story up. I think the characters in it look amazing, and the world-building. Here's hoping the reshoots fixed it up good enough!

It is really strange not hearing John Williams' music over it. It's really noticeable (to me, at least). This looks so cool though. AN actual band of rogues and rebels fighting in the streets! I want it noooooooooooooow.

Use the CODE tags. Then you can have all the white space you want

Dark in the mornings, and soon dark in the ev'nings No sun till Feb term

Emailed work missing, sent from Gmail but not here; sent to Mum instead.

C-Al-puccino! Very clever, sir

Been reading the previews that have popped up around the web and oh my goodness this sounds so good. I will get burnt again, because no Civ is ever ready at launch despite how excited I've gotten myself, but this one sounds really good!

Still absolutely fine for us. No problems. Very happy.

Haiku means Haiku means Haiku means Haiku means Haiku means Haiku

Sand between fingers, falling to the ground. And so we drift off-topic.

The web filter logs scroll past my eyes like endless autumn leaves in wind.

Like shoots in spring that push through fallen leaves, this thread is reborn, revived.

Alas, that's a clip from their live show, not the Grand Tour: Sorry, That Video Of Ben Collins Is Not A Clip From The Grand Tour