1981

Arts & Entertainment / Re: The Pink Floyd discography listen-through

« on: September 27, 2014, 06:19:17 PM »

Point Me at the Sky / Careful With That Axe, Eugene
Single


Recorded: 4 November 1968
Released: 17 December 1968

Band lineup

Roger Waters (bass)
David Gilmour (guitar)
Richard Wright (keyboards)
Nick Mason (drums)

Side A

Point Me at the Sky (Gilmour, Waters) (3:35)

Side B

Careful With That Axe, Eugene (Gilmour, Waters, Wright, Mason) (5:45)

Review

This record was not particularly noteworthy or successful at the time of its release; in fact, it was at this point that Floyd decided to stop making singles and focus on albums. However, what makes it noteworthy is that it is the earliest example of a Gilmour/Waters songwriting collaboration, which would become a mainstay of '70s Floyd.

Personally, I think Point Me at the Sky is their best single since See Emily Play. It's fairly standard psychedelic rock, with two slow, organ-driven verses contrasted with guitar-driven choruses on alternating I-IV power chords. The lyrics are science-fictiony, telling the story of a flying machine that travels to space (hence "point me at the sky"). There may or may not be an intended jab at the Apollo program; Floyd's lyrics at this early stage were so vague that it's difficult to tell.

The B-side is just a 6-minute improvised jam, with Roger saying "careful with that axe, Eugene" and screaming in the middle of it. This is the first usage of a scream in Pink Floyd's music, but this piece would go on to become a staple of their live shows for years to come, and Roger would eventually come to use screaming frequently in his later career. Anyway, this version of the song isn't that great, but it provided the spark that finally ignited post-Barrett Floyd's original sound.

I think this single is worth hearing, if only because it's the first time this band found a steady footing.

1982

Arts & Entertainment / Re: The Pink Floyd discography listen-through

« on: September 27, 2014, 05:50:59 PM »

A Saucerful of Secrets
Studio album


Recorded: August 1967 - May 1968
Released: 29 June 1968

Band lineup

Syd Barrett (guitar on "Remember a Day", "Set the Controls" and "Jugband Blues")
Richard Wright (keyboards)
Roger Waters (bass)
Nick Mason (drums)
David Gilmour (guitar, except "Remember a Day" and "Jugband Blues")

Side A

1. Let There Be More Light (Waters) (5:38)
2. Remember a Day (Wright) (4:33)
3. Set the Controls for the Heart of the Sun (Waters) (5:28)
4. Corporal Clegg (Waters) (4:13)

Side B

1. A Saucerful of Secrets (Waters, Wright, Mason, Gilmour) (11:57)
  I. Something Else
  II. Syncopated Pandemonium
  III. Storm Signal
  IV. Celestial Voices
2. See-Saw (Wright) (4:36)
3. Jugband Blues (Barrett) (3:00)

Review

This album was recorded over the period of time when David joined and Syd left the band. As a result, it's much more inconsistent than its predecessor; the best tracks are the one that Syd wrote himself, and the ones the band recorded after his departure (presumably Roger and Rick had had time to improve their songwriting by then). Unfortunately, this leaves half of side A ("Remember a Day" and "Set the Controls") as meandering filler.

Setting that aside for a moment, Let There Be More Light is a great start to the album, considering that the band had just lost its lead songwriter and guitarist. It's an early example of how well this band's vocal talents could work together when they wanted to; Roger, Rick and David all share the lead vocals on this track. The instrumentation is also well executed, opening with an organ solo over a dramatic vamp (which would in fact be reused as "Dramatic Theme" for a film soundtrack the following year), and ending with a fade-out guitar solo over the main vamp used for the verses. Not absolutely spectacular, but a great opener.

Remember a Day seems like one of Rick's early attempts to write a song in the vein of Syd's pop style, and completely failing to produce anything interesting. Set the Controls is a sinister Waters concoction that he inexplicably insists on performing on tour even today; as always, the album version consists of terrible lyrics and a mind-crushingly boring vamp, with lame improvisations that do nothing to improve things. That's five and a half minutes of my life I'll never get back.

Things start to look up again for side A with Corporal Clegg, the first of many, many songs Waters would write about lasting effects of wars on personal lives. Largely motivated by his father's death in World War II, he more or less made a career out of this theme from the late '70s onwards. However, I digress. Corporal Clegg is a decent piece, and a nice wrap-up for side A. It's also one of only two Pink Floyd tracks ever to feature vocals by Nick Mason, which makes this album the only Floyd album (aside from compilation albums) to have vocals from all five band members.

Then we get to side B, perhaps at once the best and the most depressing collection of music Floyd would release in the '60s. The title track is an absolute masterpiece; unlike the lengthy track on Piper, this isn't an extended jam, but a multi-part suite with a lot of tape editing effects thrown in. Something Else, the opening part, consists of a general atmosphere of building tension, with repeated percussive hits growing more rapid.

Eventually, it builds up to a climax and in comes Syncopated Pandemonium. This is a drum loop very similar (perhaps it's the same recording?) to the one played on Nick's Boogie, although it's actually a tape loop here. Over the top of this, there are some backwards cymbal hits, coupled with guitar noises made by Gilmour dragging his slide up and down. The overall atmosphere is one of... well, syncopated pandemonium.

This gradually gives way to Storm Signal, a short section that sounds like -- you guessed it, a storm signal! It's hard to describe, but the combination of the organ and percussion in this section sounds exactly like the calm before a storm. And a storm it is; the tour de force of the album, the Celestial Voices finale to the title track, consists of a powerful repeating 16-chord organ performance, gradually getting louder with every repeat. After a couple of repeats, a lone vocal (I think it's Gilmour) comes in over the top; it's completely wordless, just singing a note over each chord. As the chord sequence repeats, the vocals intensify, with more and more harmonies being layered on top, and finally resolving to a major chord. Splendid.

See-Saw is another Wright song; similarly to Remember a Day, this also deals with nostalgia about childhood. This one has a more specific theme, though; it's about a brother and sister who are very close, and gradually drift apart as she grows up and gets married ("she grows up for another man"). The chorus goes "another time, another day, a brother's way to leave" -- perhaps more insight into Rick's personal life? I find this depressing to listen to, in a good way, but it pales in comparison to the next track.

Jugband Blues, the album closer, is the only song written and sung by Syd. It opens with the lines "it's awfully considerate of you to think of me here / and I'm awfully obliged to you for making it clear that I'm not here". Syd seems to be intentionally avoiding any form of rhyme or meter, instead making a very direct statement about his parting with the band. After the lyrics, the song gets more and more discordant. A Salvation Army band was brought in to play on this song, but they aren't playing anything in particular; it just sounds like each one instrument is playing its own separate melody. Meanwhile, Syd does some fantastic psychedelic guitar work over the top.

Finally, the cacophony of brass instruments cuts off suddenly, leaving only Syd strumming an acoustic guitar. He sings the last four lines of the album, and the last four lines he would ever sing with Pink Floyd: "and the sea isn't green / and I love the queen / and what exactly is a dream? / and what exactly is a joke?". Another fantastic album ending from Syd, although this time, it leaves me feeling mainly depressed rather than impressed. The guy was a genius, but was about to disappear from the music business forever.

In summary, side A is half-decent, half-crap, side B is amazing but extremely depressing. It's up to you if you think that sounds like your bag of tea.

1983

Arts & Entertainment / Re: The Pink Floyd discography listen-through

« on: September 27, 2014, 04:43:03 PM »

It Would Be So Nice / Julia Dream
Single


Released: 12 April 1968

Band lineup

Richard Wright (keyboards)
Roger Waters (bass)
Nick Mason (drums)
David Gilmour (guitar)

Side A

It Would Be So Nice (Wright) (3:47)

Side B

Julia Dream (Waters) (2:37)

Review

This single is the first thing Floyd released following Syd's departure from the band, and their sound is already markedly different, having replaced Syd's experimental psychedelia with David's bluesy licks. The other thing that's different about this single is the songwriting; neither track was written by Syd. At this point, the band was trying to find a new direction, with Rick and Roger having had only one songwriting experience apiece.

While this isn't a shining beacon of what post-Barrett Floyd would become, I don't think it's bad. I find It Would Be So Nice to be a very catchy pop song, if you're into that sort of thing. As with many of Rick's early songs, it seems to describe a general dissatisfaction with interpersonal relationships; whether that's a reflection of his personal life, or just the way he wrote songs, I don't know. The chorus consists of the single sentiment "it would be so nice to meet sometime", which I read to mean that in spite of social difficulties, the protagonist would still like to spend time with someone occasionally. Maybe I'm just reading too much of my own life into it.

The B-side is a slow song with typical pretentiously symbolic Waters lyrics; no doubt a precursor to The Wall. It also features Gilmour experimenting with the Binson Echorec, although the resultant sound is still distinctively different from Syd's playing.

I prefer this to Apples and Oranges, but it's nowhere near the calibre of Syd's songwriting on the first two singles. Entirely missable.

1984

Arts & Entertainment / Re: The Pink Floyd discography listen-through

« on: September 27, 2014, 04:16:40 PM »

Apples and Oranges / Paint Box
Single


Recorded: October 1967
Released: 18 November 1967

Band lineup

Syd Barrett (guitar)
Richard Wright (keyboards)
Roger Waters (bass)
Nick Mason (drums)

Side A

Apples and Oranges (Barrett) (3:08)

Side B

Paint Box (Wright) (3:33)

Review

Apples and Oranges represents a significant departure from Floyd's signature sound up until now. While their established material relies heavily on organ and echo effects, this song uses a much more conventional guitar riff, and is the first time Floyd made significant use of guitar feedback. The guitar on this track is somewhat reminiscent of the Beatles' Sgt. Pepper album.

The lyrics have also condensed into something more mainstream; the subject matter is meeting a girl at a grocery store (hence "apples and oranges"). Again, this sounds more like something the Beatles would write than anything Floyd released previously.

Paint Box represents Wright's first songwriting attempt, and it kind of meanders around without going anywhere. The lyrics seem to describe the protagonist as having a generally disorganised lifestyle, but apart from that, there's no discernible meaning or point. The highlight is the decent-but-not-great piano solo.

This is Floyd's first single that fails to particularly thrill me. It's not bad, there's just nothing original about it. Go and listen to the Beatles instead.

1985

Arts & Entertainment / Re: The Pink Floyd discography listen-through

« on: September 27, 2014, 03:38:54 PM »

The Piper at the Gates of Dawn
Studio album


Recorded: February - May 1967
Released: 5 August 1967

Band lineup

Syd Barrett (guitar)
Richard Wright (keyboards)
Roger Waters (bass)
Nick Mason (drums)

All tracks authored by Syd Barrett, except where noted.

Side A

1. Astronomy Domine (4:12)
2. Lucifer Sam (3:07)
3. Matilda Mother (3:08)
4. Flaming (2:46)
5. Pow R. Toc H. (Barrett, Waters, Wright, Mason) (4:26)
6. Take Up Thy Stethoscope and Walk (Waters) (3:05)

Side B

1. Interstellar Overdrive (Barrett, Waters, Wright, Mason) (9:41)
2. The Gnome (2:13)
3. Chapter 24 (3:42)
4. The Scarecrow (2:11)
5. Bike (3:21)

Review

Side A is just about the strongest LP side any band could hope for on a debut album. Mixed in with the usual psychedelia (Astronomy Domine, Flaming and Pow R. Toc H.), we also get a couple of more straightforward pop tunes (Lucifer Sam and Matilda Mother), as well as Roger's first song (Take Up Thy Stethoscope and Walk) -- certainly a long way from the Roger-led Floyd that would churn out The Wall.

I really can't stress how catchy the first six tracks on this album are. Syd was a master of intertwining pop with psychedelic rock, and most of these tracks have elements of both. For me, the highlight of side 1 is Pow R. Toc H., which has no lyrics, but it does have an excellent opening consisting of weird noises, both sound effects and wordless vocal sounds. After a minute or so of this, the remainder of the track is mainly instrumental improvisations.

Roger's effort is a bit unexpected; he seems to have largely copied Syd's songwriting style for his first attempt, and the result isn't that bad. It fits in nicely with the flow of the album, and has lyrics that seem to be about being given various ridiculous treatments from a doctor.

Side B is a little more inconsistent, I think. While the tracks are all enjoyable, it feels more like a collection of singles than a coherent album side. The exception is Interstellar Overdrive, and I still find this version of it mind-numbingly dull. I get the impression they edited it down to fit on an album by removing all the "uninteresting" bits, resulting in nothing but echoey guitars (some overdubbed, as there is definitely a second guitar track at times) for most of it.

I will say that the segue into The Gnome is very well done; this may well be the only album in existence where a 10-minute psychedelic improvisation makes a segue into a silly pop song about a gnome. I never liked Chapter 24 too much, but I enjoyed it more than I remembered on this listen-through; and Scarecrow I already reviewed as the B-side to See Emily Play.

And then there's Bike. Syd has really pulled out all the stops here, as this sounds like a truly demented perversion of all your favourite '60s pop elements. It's almost pop, but it's like you're listening to pop through a kaleidoscope, and the lyrics are directed at a girl, boasting about various things (including a bike) that the singer has. The last thing he boasts about is "a room full of musical tunes, some rhyme, some jing, most of them are clockwork". The last two minutes of the album then consist of various ringing, chiming and beeping noises.

This is the only Floyd album which Syd Barrett had a significant influence over, and it is a truly excellent showcase of his talents. Absolutely essential.

1986

Arts & Entertainment / Re: The Pink Floyd discography listen-through

« on: September 27, 2014, 02:46:08 PM »

See Emily Play / Scarecrow
Single


Recorded: May 1967
Released: 16 June 1967

Band lineup

Syd Barrett (guitar)
Richard Wright (keyboards)
Roger Waters (bass)
Nick Mason (drums)

All tracks authored by Syd Barrett.

Side A

See Emily Play (2:53)

Side B

Scarecrow (2:08)

Review

More psychedelic pop, coming up! These aren't quite as silly-sounding as the previous single, despite See Emily Play being about a girl playing with her toys. The band also backed off on the echo a little, although See Emily Play still has a lot of organ, as well as a sped-up piano section.

Compared to the three other singles up until now, Scarecrow is rather subdued and conventional. It also Floyd's first significant use of vocal harmonies, sounding almost Beatlesque, except for the organ and the steady clapping rhythm. This track would later appear on their debut album.

This is entirely skippable, since the A-side would later appear on Relics and the B-side on The Piper at the Gates of Dawn. Get those instead; Floyd was always better as an album band.

1987

Arts & Entertainment / Re: The Pink Floyd discography listen-through

« on: September 27, 2014, 02:31:09 PM »

Arnold Layne / Candy and a Currant Bun
Single


Recorded: January-February 1967
Released: 10 March 1967

Band lineup

Syd Barrett (guitar)
Richard Wright (keyboards)
Roger Waters (bass)
Nick Mason (drums)

All tracks authored by Syd Barrett.

Side A

Arnold Layne (2:52)

Side B

Candy and a Currant Bun (2:38)

Review

Saddam put it best: "psychedelic pop". These are a healthy mix of silly pop songs and Syd-era Floyd's trademark echoey guitar and organ.

Arnold Layne is a song about a guy who steals ladies' underwear from washing lines. It reprimands him, and encourages him to not "do it again". It also includes a short organ solo. Like most Floyd attempts at singles, it ends up sounding overly silly and just short enough that it doesn't really go anywhere, but at least these early singles are charmingly silly.

Candy and a Currant Bun was originally titled "Let's Roll Another One", but it had to be rewritten so as not to be about drugs to appease the censors of 1960s Britain. This is perhaps my favourite Syd-penned single, and I prefer it to the A-side. In addition to the silly, cutesy lyrics, this song includes a few verbal gags (after the line "please, you know you drive me wild", a deadly-serious voice repeats "drive me wild"), and ends with some thoroughly Binson'd organ.

While this is enjoyable, it's not nearly as good a debut single as it could have been. Worth hearing if you like throwaway pop.

1988

Arts & Entertainment / Re: The Pink Floyd discography listen-through

« on: September 27, 2014, 02:08:26 PM »

London '66-'67
(aka Tonite Let's All Make Love in London)
Film (directed by Peter Whitehead)

Recorded: 11-12 January 1967
Released: 19 September 1995

Band lineup

Syd Barrett (guitar)
Richard Wright (keyboards)
Roger Waters (bass)
Nick Mason (drums)

Track listing

1. Interstellar Overdrive (Barrett, Mason, Waters, Wright) (16:46)
2. Nick's Boogie (Mason) (11:55)

Review

This is a film of collated imagery of the London 1960s psychedelic scene, with Pink Floyd performing what was then one of their staple tunes, Interstellar Overdrive, as accompaniment. About a third to half of the footage is of Pink Floyd playing; the rest is footage from various nightclubs around London. It was later re-released on DVD, with Nick's Boogie (an entirely improvised number to make the most of available studio time) as a bonus track.

The structure of Interstellar Overdrive is a riff consisting of powerful, descending chords in E major, followed by extended, loosely structured improvisation, followed by a return to the main riff. It's fairly simple, and in my view this recording showcases it at its best. This performance doesn't have the studio editing that would go into "perfecting" the album version later that year, making this a raw, unbridled glimpse of early Floyd.

It's quite remarkable how Syd and Richard (who each have a Binson Echorec tape echo device hooked up to their respective instruments) manage to play so well together, despite the very loose structure of this piece. The one-chord vamp seems to rise and fall, with Syd gradually drifting further and further from playing an actual melody, at times just making toneless plucking noises or running his slide up and down his guitar's strings. This is made all the more eerie by the echoes from the Binson, and Richard is always right there on the same page as Syd, whatever he's doing.

Turning to the other two members of the group, Roger and Nick mainly keep a steady beat going throughout the piece, but towards the end they start to get a little more involved in the improv as the whole thing nears its climax. It's quite hilarious to watch the same Roger Waters who would go on to write The Wall rocking out on his bass with a big grin on his face. Meanwhile, Nick is the same old Nick he would always be; just along for the ride, but never trying to get into the limelight.

As it turned out, the band had booked more studio time than they needed, giving them time to play another piece. Since they didn't have one prepared, they decided to improvise something based around a rhythm Nick played on the toms using mallets. This one ends up with a much darker feel than Interstellar Overdrive, with the Binson echoes dominating most of the piece, and Roger doing some of his best bass work I've ever heard. The piece ends with a short drum solo from Nick.

The band members themselves look much younger and less sure of themselves than they would in later films. Also, Rick looks very out of place wearing a white shirt and tie, while the rest of the group are dressed very casually. One thing's for sure, though; they all deliver rock-solid performances that put much of their later, more polished work to shame.

All in all, an interesting look at the band's early history, which would later prove to be their best recorded improvisation with Syd, and a very tight performance that would take Gilmour-era Floyd some time to match. This is 29 minutes of footage no psychedelic rock fan should miss.

1989

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Australian anti-terrorism laws

« on: September 27, 2014, 09:20:39 AM »

Upon reflection, this might just have gotten me angry enough to finally join the Sex Party. I agree with every one of their 10 primary policies listed on their Policies page (though I'm not sure I'm in agreement with all of their policies listed on sub-pages, but all those I might disagree with are worded vaguely enough that I don't know), and they oppose this new legislation.

I want to consider this some more first. I don't actually know what's involved in membership in a political party, so I will research that before making a decision.

1990

Arts & Entertainment / Re: Just Watched

« on: September 27, 2014, 07:07:16 AM »

What about the 2004 series?

That's up next.

Are you going to watch the Stargate franchise some time?

Perhaps. I generally decide what I'm going to watch next after I finish watching the last thing.

1991

Arts & Entertainment / The Pink Floyd discography listen-through

« on: September 27, 2014, 06:38:33 AM »

Pink Floyd was the band that got me "into" music, back in 2005. I haven't listened to much of their stuff in years, so this weekend and next weekend, I'm going to do a complete listen-through of their material, in chronological order, and post a short review of each thing here.

"Chronological" is applied somewhat loosely; I won't be starting with their first release, but rather with their earliest released recording, a DVD called London '66-'67 with two extended early Floyd improvisations. Then I'll begin on the early singles, interleaved with their early albums in the order they were released. I won't include most compilations, but I will include Relics, which is largely just down to personal preference.

I plan to finish with their Live 8 appearance in 2005, the last time the four members of post-'60s Floyd ever performed together. Then I'll return when The Endless River gets released, to post a review of that.

1992

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Australian anti-terrorism laws

« on: September 27, 2014, 04:44:28 AM »

From what I understand, if you're serious about privacy you need to use a VPN now.

I may set up a VPS in Japan to do that. If I do end up doing that, anyone on FES who'd like a free VPN is welcome to use it.

I'd write to my member but she's proven herself a total airhead in the past so I don't see a point.

I might do that. My electorate has been a safe Liberal seat since it was established in 1949, though, so I can't imagine her caring very much.

The only place I've seen concern for this is the internet. Don't count on the public giving a single shit, everyone I've seen in public (including friends and people my age) think it's a good thing that will help fight terrorism, which remains to be seen.

Most people I've talked to feel the same way I do, but that's pretty much entirely people at work, who are also Linux geeks.

1993

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Australian anti-terrorism laws

« on: September 26, 2014, 05:36:04 PM »

This sounds just like the Patriot Act.

Yeah, that sounds very familiar.

I had the same thought. The PATRIOT Act is one of the reasons I avoid the USA. If this doesn't get nipped in the bud, I may end up leaving Australia as well.

1994

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Australian anti-terrorism laws

« on: September 26, 2014, 05:18:51 PM »

Main article: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/australias-new-security-laws-explained-20140926-10mh6d.html

This has been all over the news here lately. In short, our government is about to pass laws granting special immunity to agents working on loosely-defined "special intelligence operations", stricter penalties for anyone reporting information about said missions, and virtually unlimited power to access computer systems. In the name of fighting terrorism, of course.

This change has come about rather suddenly, after alleged terrorist plots in Sydney. I can't say I'm too happy with the reaction of Parliament, but this has been supported by both of our major parties, which in practice means an almost unanimous vote. I suppose the one good thing that might come of this is that people might stop voting the same idiots in every few years, but I don't hold out too much hope of that.

This whole thing is sickening to me. According to that article, there is more legislation on the way, which would enable the government to require me to prove that I'm not a terrorist if I decide to take a trip to Syria. There is a fairly substantial Arab population in Australia, many of whom no doubt have family in Syria. Now they may have to conjure up proof (if anyone wants to tell me how the fuck they're supposed to do that, please go right ahead) that they aren't engaging in terrorism every time they visit their families.

As far as I'm concerned, any party which supports these bills is never getting another vote from me.

1995

Technology & Information / Re: Glad I don't have a Linux thingy

« on: September 26, 2014, 04:13:35 PM »

I would actually like one of our friendly IT people that frequent tFES to better explain what this is all about.

It is a *nix command processor that is frequently installed in Unix-like computers. If you are familiar with Windows, think of the "cmd" command line (although not technically a shell). It passes commands to the system and can do all kinds of powerful things, especially with scripting. The vulnerability is that there is an exploit that allows the hax0rs to use TCP protocols to execute bash commands on the local server. Basically, they can take control of a web server on the public facing Internet, or other protocols where NAT is used to expose the server to the Internet (telnet, ssh, etc.) All kinds of nasty things can be done from there assuming they have the necessary privileges.

It's a little more complex than this. Since the vulnerability is in bash (a command interpreter, or shell), an attacker would need to find a way to cause a server to execute bash. Executing a shell to process a command is very commonly done in many different server applications, so it's not infeasible, but it does require a bit of work and some luck to get a successful attack.

Additionally, the vulnerability requires setting an environment variable prior to bash being executed. An environment variable is a piece of information set by a program that can be read by another program it executes. Therefore, a successful attack relies not only on a program executing bash, but also on the attacker being able to set arbitrary environment variables. Again, this isn't particularly uncommon, but it requires some effort on the part of the attacker.

There is also the fact that this bug is easier to patch than, say, the not-too-long-ago Heartbleed vulnerability in OpenSSL. The Heartbleed bug was a library bug, and libraries will be loaded once and kept in memory by an application while running, so upgrading the library is insufficient -- you also need to restart everything that uses it. By contrast, bash is an executable that is run when it is needed, typically not loaded into memory, so just upgrading bash will secure most installations.

Finally, not all Linux distributions use bash as their system shell (although it will generally be installed on all of them). Debian, the operating system this forum runs on, uses a much more lightweight shell called dash as its system shell. Unless an application specifically asks for bash, the default command interpreter will be dash, which isn't vulnerable.

So while this would be a severe problem if it were taken advantage of, it's difficult to predict whether an attack will be successful without knowing the details of the system you're attacking, which makes successful attacks unlikely. Combined with the fact that anyone who knows what they're doing has already patched this bug (at work, we patched all our servers the day this was announced), you have to both suck at maintaining your system and be rather unlucky to get popped. That said, it will become more likely the longer you wait to patch, as people find more and more ways to exploit it.

And yes, FES was patched long before I saw this thread. I may be too busy to post much during the week, but I'm never too busy to look after the place.

I am not entirely sure what the exploit affords them, but you would still need to elevate the privileges unless they are logged in as root which the one thing you aren't supposed to do.

The exploit allows them to essentially do anything the user they compromise is allowed to do. There are some applications which need to run as root, such as sshd, as well as OpenVPN in some configurations, and you don't get to choose which way the attacker gets in.

Best case scenario, they get in via a web server (you don't run your web server as root, right?) and start using sendmail to spam people, or mining Bitcoins. Worst case scenario, they manage to pop some root-requiring daemon and you get completely pwned.

It's all very circumstantial, but a well-managed server following general security best practices will stand a better chance against any vulnerability than one not managed properly.

Also, I am now ultra safe:

>2014
>not using Aptitude::CmdLine::Show-Versions

1996

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Responsible suicide

« on: September 26, 2014, 03:35:32 PM »

I'm a fan of carbon monoxide poisoning myself

As am I. I love driving my car, and I can't think of a better way to go than to drive out to some remote location, hook up a hose to the exhaust and sit there serenely with the engine humming. I'd probably leave a note saying whoever wants the car can just take it; that way, I'm not burdening someone with disposing of my vehicle without some form of payment.

As for being responsible about the emotional side of things, I have never had many friends and I don't think it would be too difficult to make myself disappear mostly unnoticed, if I wanted to. I find it interesting that I'm actually more concerned about the practical ramifications of my suicide than emotional ones. In particular, I acknowledge that I make significant technical contributions, both in my day job and as part of running this place, and I consider that to be the primary value of my life.

Curious. I've never consciously acknowledged that before.

1997

Arts & Entertainment / Re: Just Watched

« on: September 21, 2014, 11:16:31 AM »

What about the 2004 series?

That's up next.

1998

Arts & Entertainment / Re: Just Watched

« on: September 20, 2014, 07:37:28 PM »

I finished Galactica 1980. I hereby unhesitatingly declare that it is, without a doubt, the worst TV series I have ever made the mistake of deciding to watch.

Every single episode makes its plot painfully obvious from the start. The original Battlestar Galactica included previews of the episode to come at the start too, but just enough to give the viewer an appetite for things to come. 1980 gives away everything at the start.

Part of the problem is that they never introduce any significant complications. The good guys come up with a plan, they execute it, the bad guys practically trip over their own toes, and the plan is successful. But it doesn't feel like a victory when there was nothing in their way at any point.

I honestly wish they'd never tried to bring it back. The original Battlestar Galactica stands quite well on its own.

1999

Status Notices / Re: Scheduled maintenance, 2014-09-20

« on: September 20, 2014, 08:48:27 AM »

Update: I've fixed the main problem that caused the delay. In short, sysvinit is weird. systemd can't come soon enough.

2000

Status Notices / Re: Scheduled maintenance, 2014-09-20

« on: September 20, 2014, 07:14:13 AM »

We were down for slightly longer than intended, due to some unintended problems with the server. The problems weren't related to the updates, but they hadn't manifested themselves until the server was rebooted to use the updated packages.

I've worked around them for now, and I'll be working to resolve them to avoid a recurrence. Apologies for the inconvenience, and thanks for flying Flat Earth Society.