search for: eyeballing

Hi I'm sure this question has been asked before but I can't find it in the archives. I have a data frame which includes interval and ordered nominal results. It looks something like "Measured" "Eyeball" 46.5 Normal 43.5 Mild 56.2 Normal 41.1 Mild 37.8 Moderate 12.6 Severe 17.3 Moderate 39.1 Normal 26.7 Mild NULL Normal 27.9 NULL 68.1

>>> TL;DR: please try the patch out and report if it causes "Did not receive >>> identification string" log messages. I believe it does not. Aw crap. My homegrown anti-dos tool for ssh looks for either DNRIS or if logging is verbose enough a connection that didn't result in a login. I give the attacker a few tries and whitelist any successful candidate so I

Hi, On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 11:32:26AM +0000, Kim Minh Kaplan wrote: > TL;DR: please try the patch out and report if it causes "Did not receive > identification string" log messages. I believe it does not. It depends on absolute RTT to the target. If you stay local ("< 50ms"), the 250ms offset should reliably avoid DNIS logs. If you happen to connect to Australia

I see that back in 2018 there was a proposed patch to implement RFC 8305 aka happy eyeballs. Did that go anywhere? Basically, did 8305 get into OpenSSH? If not, would there be any interest in a new patch for it? Chris

On Thu, 13 Feb 2025, Chris Rapier wrote: > I see that back in 2018 there was a proposed patch to implement RFC 8305 aka > happy eyeballs. Did that go anywhere? Basically, did 8305 get into OpenSSH? If > not, would there be any interest in a new patch for it? I don't remember the patch and AFAIK it didn't go in

On Fri, 14 Feb 2025 at 11:44, Damien Miller <djm at mindrot.org> wrote: > On Thu, 13 Feb 2025, Chris Rapier wrote: > > > I see that back in 2018 there was a proposed patch to implement RFC 8305 > aka > > happy eyeballs. Did that go anywhere? Basically, did 8305 get into > OpenSSH? If > > not, would there be any interest in a new patch for it? > > I

On 2/13/25 19:57, Darren Tucker wrote: > On Fri, 14 Feb 2025 at 11:44, Damien Miller <djm at mindrot.org > <mailto:djm at mindrot.org>> wrote: > > On Thu, 13 Feb 2025, Chris Rapier wrote: > > > I see that back in 2018 there was a proposed patch to implement > RFC 8305 aka > > happy eyeballs. Did that go anywhere? Basically, did 8305

Just a point about plotting and abline with a dotted grid. Try this for size: eh<-function (mx, my, line='dotted') { x <- c(0, mx) y <- c(0, my) plot(x, y, "l") abline(v = seq(0, mx, 10), h = seq(0, my, 10), lty = line) } eh(100,100) eh(100,1000) eh(100,5000) eh(100,10000) When there are enough horizontal lines, the dotted characteristic makes it

On 2/14/25 13:04, Gert Doering wrote: > Hi, > > On Fri, Feb 14, 2025 at 11:51:47AM -0500, Chris Rapier wrote: >> Would there be any interest in an implementation for OpenSSH or should I >> develop it for HPN-SSH first and report back? > > I do wonder if HE is really still needed in 2025. If one of the protocols > is not available at all, failover is already quick -

I''ve been working on a patch for has_one :through associations and now it needs some verification love. http://dev.rubyonrails.org/ticket/4756 Please have a look and see if it fits the bill. Constructive criticism welcome! Thanks, Chris --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails:

Hi, On Fri, Feb 14, 2025 at 11:51:47AM -0500, Chris Rapier wrote: > Would there be any interest in an implementation for OpenSSH or should I > develop it for HPN-SSH first and report back? I do wonder if HE is really still needed in 2025. If one of the protocols is not available at all, failover is already quick - and if one is broken, it's useful to actually notice that it is so, and

Has anyone checked to make sure that this won't upset sshguard? [1] Offhand, it looks like it will [2][3]. [1] https://www.sshguard.net/ [2] https://bitbucket.org/sshguard/sshguard/src/2ed7e0aee18b7271daab92d5335c14e04bb2cc89/src/parser/attacks.txt?at=master&fileviewer=file-view-default#attacks.txt-9 [3]

...esearch." ?Publishers will publish a book written by (almost) anyone - > I know this, because I've written some of them and they were > published. > > There really isn't much difference, most of the time, between > different sorts of residuals, usually they are used for eyeballing > potential problems in your data, in which case it doesn't matter which > you use. -- I believe this is a bit too facile. In GLM's and even in plain (least squares) multiple regression, different residuals can have different sd's, so that, for example, a large in magnitude resi...

Hi, Taking this to a new thread. Thoughts on getting a new list started up ? Should it be centos-sysadmin or centos-infra ? Are we going to then restrict it to admin/infra related chatter ? in which case, does the eyeball density on this list reduce for that sort of content ? How about the politics and news stuff that gets posted to this list. And how would those things be addressed with

listadmin, Can you PLEASE, PLEASE find *any* other blacklist than manitu? This asshole's method was ok a dozen years ago; these days, with hosting sites hosting tens or hundreds of thousands of domains, with too many running Windows, and so infected and sending out spam. They then send all mail via one mailhost, with the result that those of us with *no* spam coming out are frequently

Hello, I use hosts that are dual stack configured (IPv4 and IPv6) and it happens that connectivity through one or the other is broken and timeouts. In these case connection to the SSH server can take quite some time as ssh waits for the first address to timeout before trying the next. So I gave a stab at implementing RFC 8305. This patch implements part of it in sshconnect.c. * It does not do

FYI, http://www.informit.com/articles/article.aspx?p=1215438 -Rajika -- http://wso2.org/ http://llvm.org/ http://www.osdev.org/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20090405/79ddb769/attachment.html>

On Sunday 05 April 2009 06:33:00 Rajika Kumarasiri wrote: > FYI, > http://www.informit.com/articles/article.aspx?p=1215438 > > -Rajika LOL: "In contrast, every time I look at the GCC code, it takes two people to prevent me from clawing my eyeballs out." :-) -- Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e

I've experienced GCC induced eyeball-clawing.... Not pretty! On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 9:37 AM, Jon Harrop <jon at ffconsultancy.com> wrote: > On Sunday 05 April 2009 06:33:00 Rajika Kumarasiri wrote: > > FYI, > > http://www.informit.com/articles/article.aspx?p=1215438 > > > > -Rajika > > LOL: > > "In contrast, every time I look at the GCC

...rder to test it, I can apply it to a unit vector (0,0,1) in Cartesian coordinates. The result is supposed to be a set of random, uniformly distributed, points on a sphere (not the point of the algorithm, but a way to test it). This is what the points look like when I plot them, but other then eyeballing them, can anyone suggest a test to ensure that I am really generating uniform random points on a sphere? Many thanks Lorenzo