It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
avatar
dtgreene: Why "etherwake" rather than "wakeonlan"?
No reason. etherwake and wakeonlan will both do the same thing. Use whichever you like.

avatar
dtgreene: Will wake-on-lan wake up a computer that's just sleeping (as opposed to one that is fully powered down)?
It should.

avatar
dtgreene: (Also, usually "#" is used to indicate that a command should be run as root, and you don't normally use "sudo" if you're root already.)
Either:
# sudo wakeonlan
or:
$ wakeonlan
@dtgreene

I use it to wash my cloths (j/k)

I shut it down every night.
- Lowers my energy bill. (hey I can buy an extra candy bar or two, until I go see the dentist...)
- Hopefully extends the life of my hardware. (bad enough I don't exercise my duster...the fluffy thing)
- The lights from monitor keep me up at night. (bounces off the wall mounted mirror that takes up the whole wall...don't ask)
- Prefer not to keep a constant connection to the internet when I'm not around. (I'm not paranoid...pretty sure)

- Gave you a +1 since I too am wondering why you got rated down. Someone seems to care too deeply about you. May want to tell them to you can only handle so much love.
.
Post edited January 15, 2021 by gog2002x
avatar
gog2002x: - Hopefully extends the life of my hardware. (bad enough I don't exercise my duster...the fluffy thing)
It probably has the opposite effect. Not significant, but booting up is more consuming than a few hours of idling.

No need to change behaviour because of this. I also turn my computer off if I am not going to be using it within a couple of hours.

avatar
gog2002x: - Gave you a +1 since I too am wondering why you got rated down.
Just noticed since you mentioned it. Yeah, what gives? This is an interesting question. Also +1'd.
avatar
gog2002x: - Hopefully extends the life of my hardware. (bad enough I don't exercise my duster...the fluffy thing)
avatar
frogthroat: It probably has the opposite effect. Not significant, but booting up is more consuming than a few hours of idling.

No need to change behaviour because of this. I also turn my computer off if I am not going to be using it within a couple of hours.
Good info, thanks. Saves me time Googling. :)
.
avatar
gog2002x: - Gave you a +1 since I too am wondering why you got rated down.
avatar
frogthroat: Just noticed since you mentioned it. Yeah, what gives? This is an interesting question. Also +1'd.
No idea on this either. Guess anonymity allows people to swing that hammer pretty fast and furious.
.
Post edited January 15, 2021 by gog2002x
avatar
scientiae: Win10 has a very annoying log-in process.
avatar
frogthroat: Nope. It's wonderful. The optional (on by default) loading of startup applications already during the login screen is great. Makes booting up even faster when you have a fast computer and an SSD.

avatar
scientiae: (WinXP, Win3.1)
avatar
frogthroat: You probably mean Win8.1? Win3.1 was not an operating system, per se. It was more of a graphical interface for the operating system at the time, MS-DOS. And loading Win3.1 was pretty fast even on old 386 computers. No network, no problems. (Network came with Win3.11/NT3.51.) It was when all this internet stuff and constant updates started to come with Win95/NT4 generation when things became slow.
No I don't mean Win8. You could network Win3.1. (Just as you can network a DOS machine.)

You are correct that I can't be bothered to study the intricacies of the OS, past the essentials required to make it work. Once you have learnt a few of them, their peculiarities become tedious. I prefer to simplify my digital interactions. (Perhaps one day I might need to be online more often; at that point I will take more interest in said peculiarities.)

avatar
scientiae: there are all sorts of background processes taking the focus from the keyboard when I try to enter my password, to the point that the wireless keyboard will nearly always have a buffer-dump multiple of a single keypress when the log-in process returns.
avatar
frogthroat: Oh, that sounds annoying. If it is a desktop, you can set it to log in automatically. It's not secure in case someone physically breaks and enters your house, though. If it's a laptop, turn the loading of startup items already in the login screen off.
It's a laptop. And most of the crap that is loading is part of the manufacturer's "value-added" software, which is very likely to mess with the underlying OS if I start messing with it, due to unintended dependencies that perhaps even the manufacturer has forgotten (coding assumptions, etc.).
avatar
scientiae: I also remove the CAT5 cable connecting it to the modem. Every time. (There are network protocols that wake up computers.
avatar
frogthroat: I hope you mean CAT5e, unless you have a 10/100 network. But why don't you turn off Wake on LAN from the BIOS if that worries you?
Yes.

And I don't turn it off because it can be turned on again, remotely.
avatar
frogthroat: I use WOL all the time. I even have buttons on my phone's desktop to turn on various computers around the house and/or see their status. Just a simple icon that sends a magic packet to the selected mac address -- magic packet is basically just a mac address and a bunch of times the letter F. Turn off WOL and the NIC is not listening for a magic packet.

Shutting my computers down remotely with an easy button on phone's desktop is a bit trickier. But it's still quite easy with JuiceSSH's snippets -- you can make a desktop icon that runs a command via ssh. Easy peasy.

Just use encrypted connections if the security worries you.

Anyway, you can either learn to use the scary functions of your computer, or you can just turn them off. There's really no need to unplug the cable every time.
I am well aware of my needs. What makes you think I don't know how to use the technology, simply because I don't trust it?

avatar
dtgreene: Anyone used to older computers will probably remember how DOS was significantly less stable than the OSes and software commonly found on other computers like the Apple 2 family.

Or, anyone who used Linux in the early days will remember how much more stable (in terms of not crashing) it was than the mainstream proprietary operating systems.

(Anyone here use (pre OS X) Macintoshes back in the day? Were they more stable than DOS/Windows, or were they just as prone to crashes?)
Yes, they were much more stable. (Fun fact: the first Macintosh DOS was too large to fit on a single floppy.)

Win3.1 (and Windows for Workplaces 3.11, coincidentally mimicking the (much more popular) Novel Netware version) were indeed a GUI upon MS-DOS.

The OS was so unstable (memory leaks especially) that it was impossible to operate without rebooting at least daily (depending on your duty cycle). Games, being advanced applications that seek to extract maximum performance, have always taxed the system more than practically anything else.

The biggest instability (after graphics card configuration) was always the TCP stack. It wasn't much later (Win2k, IIRC), that it wasn't necessary to reboot the OS when the stack crashed. And bouncing an earlier Microsoft OS took many minutes.
avatar
scientiae: I don't turn it off because it can be turned on again, remotely.
They would need to access your computer when it is on, then get from OS level to BIOS level to change that. But to do that, they would already have a connection to your computer. Sounds very unlikely anyone would bother. It would be simpler to just come to your house with a cricket bat, club you in the head and steal your computer.

avatar
scientiae: I am well aware of my needs.
Well, then. Can't argue with that.

avatar
scientiae: What makes you think I don't know how to use the technology, simply because I don't trust it?
Because it is more often people who do not understand technology who are most afraid of it. But I see from your other comments that you actually have been working with computers for quite some time.

avatar
scientiae: Novel Netware
Yeah, NN was awesome. Very stable.

avatar
scientiae: The OS was so unstable (memory leaks especially)
copy con a.bat
@echo off
cls
mem
call b.bat
^z
copy con b.bat
@echo off
cls
mem
call a.bat
^z
a.bat
avatar
scientiae: I don't turn it off because it can be turned on again, remotely.
avatar
frogthroat: They would need to access your computer when it is on, then get from OS level to BIOS level to change that. But to do that, they would already have a connection to your computer. Sounds very unlikely anyone would bother. It would be simpler to just come to your house with a cricket bat, club you in the head and steal your computer.
There are seven layers to the OSI model. For instance, I know for a fact that it is possible to place a (small, but effective) program in the Master Boot Record of a fixed disc that will not be deleted, even after a low-level format.
Recently, Intel was caught when their second-level cache was accessible by other simultaneous processes on the chip.
You are completely ignoring unknown unknowns. (Cue jump-cut to Morpheus explaining to Neo what he has determined is the machine-world vulnerability: the Matrix is built on rules that must be obeyed … except by those who can break them. ;)
avatar
scientiae: The OS was so unstable (memory leaks especially)
avatar
frogthroat: copy con a.bat
@echo off
cls
mem
call b.bat
^z
copy con b.bat
@echo off
cls
mem
call a.bat
^z
a.bat
:D
avatar
scientiae: There are seven layers to the OSI model.
Yes, that's what I was referring to with jumping levels.

avatar
scientiae: For instance, I know for a fact that it is possible to place a (small, but effective) program in the Master Boot Record of a fixed disc that will not be deleted, even after a low-level format.
That I did not know and have hard time believing. Low-level format is quite drastic, but if what you say is true, I need to read about it. Seems a bit overkill to use that against lil' ol' me. I am not that important. But hey, if it is possible, it is possible.

avatar
scientiae: Recently, Intel was caught when their second-level cache was accessible by other simultaneous processes on the chip.
Intel quite regularly have exploits in their hw. The latest I remember was their 9th gen CPUs were basically the same as 8th gen, plus security update against Meltdown and ... Spectre, was it?

avatar
scientiae: You are completely ignoring unknown unknowns.
I have backups of my important data. And most importantly: I am not that interesting. I am chronically broke so they couldn't even blackmail me if they found something compromising. If someone makes all this hassle to hack into my computer, they earned it. They can now have the bragging rights to say "I hacked a random dude's computer. I got nothing out of it, but I did it. Woo-hoo!"

I doubt you are that interesting either.

Remember: you don't need to be faster than the bear. You only need to be faster than the slowest guy running away.
avatar
scientiae: For instance, I know for a fact that it is possible to place a (small, but effective) program in the Master Boot Record of a fixed disc that will not be deleted, even after a low-level format.
avatar
frogthroat: That I did not know and have hard time believing. Low-level format is quite drastic, but if what you say is true, I need to read about it. Seems a bit overkill to use that against lil' ol' me. I am not that important. But hey, if it is possible, it is possible.
I can't convince you without demonstrating it. ;)

avatar
scientiae:
avatar
frogthroat: Intel quite regularly have exploits in their hw. The latest I remember was their 9th gen CPUs were basically the same as 8th gen, plus security update against Meltdown and ... Spectre, was it?
Thank you, I had forgotten what that one was called. :)
avatar
scientiae: You are completely ignoring unknown unknowns.
avatar
frogthroat: I doubt you are that interesting either.
He who hath a secret to keep must first keep it secret he hath a secret to keep. :-"
avatar
frogthroat: Remember: you don't need to be faster than the bear. You only need to be faster than the slowest guy running away.
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you.
avatar
frogthroat: copy con a.bat
@echo off
cls
mem
call b.bat
^z
copy con b.bat
@echo off
cls
mem
call a.bat
^z
a.bat
For fun, in modern Windows, try creating (via a GUI program) a file with the name "con", or use Windows Explorer to rename a file with the name "con".

(Worth noting that the error you get used to be less meaningful and to not make sense.)

avatar
scientiae: For instance, I know for a fact that it is possible to place a (small, but effective) program in the Master Boot Record of a fixed disc that will not be deleted, even after a low-level format.
avatar
frogthroat: That I did not know and have hard time believing. Low-level format is quite drastic, but if what you say is true, I need to read about it. Seems a bit overkill to use that against lil' ol' me. I am not that important. But hey, if it is possible, it is possible.
I've heard that there's even some hard drives with hackable firmware. A hacker could theoretically hack the firmware, and nothing about the disk contents could remove any malware that was inserted there.
Post edited February 11, 2021 by dtgreene
My general usage & gaming desktop: I leave it on. The only time I don't use it is when I sleep. But sometimes it is doing something - downloading / converting / running a backup.
I'm sure that turning on sleep would save a few euros - priorities... (when would I schedule backups if I did that?)
Nvidia Shield: always on. It's an HTPC and file server... and I'm not the only person in the house that it's "serving".
Music production laptop: I turn it off when I'm done. Same thing for my iPads, mostly used for running synth apps.
Old laptop: mostly off - I use it to watch video on the couch when my SO is watching her own thing on the big screen.
Post edited February 11, 2021 by teceem
avatar
frogthroat: That I did not know and have hard time believing. Low-level format is quite drastic, but if what you say is true, I need to read about it. Seems a bit overkill to use that against lil' ol' me. I am not that important. But hey, if it is possible, it is possible.
avatar
dtgreene: I've heard that there's even some hard drives with hackable firmware. A hacker could theoretically hack the firmware, and nothing about the disk contents could remove any malware that was inserted there.
For every system there is somebody trying to break it.
As has been said, recently, by Magnitus, here:

Also, some people with genius-level intellect are spending all their time figuring out how to break into systems and not all of them are doing it as security professionals to report flaws […], patiently looking for that vulnerability that everybody else missed.
And to make it worst, you can't really test for that stuff, because most attack vectors involve interacting with the system in ways that would never occur normally under non-malicious usage.

Its a mean world out there and if putting something important in production doesn't terrify the living daylight out of someone, then they're probably not the right person to manage a production system. It is a beast.
It's also referred to as Red Queen hypothesis, when the subject is the biosphere.
avatar
dtgreene: For fun, in modern Windows, try creating (via a GUI program) a file with the name "con", or use Windows Explorer to rename a file with the name "con".
If you want to soft lock your MS-DOS, just type copy con con. Surprisingly enough you cannot save keyboard inputs to your keyboard.

But anyway, if a software is capable of creating folders and the folder creation is not using the standard Windows dialog, I sometimes test to create folders like CON, COM1, NUL, PRN, AUX, LPT1... If the software manufacturer has implemented their own folder creation and has not blocked those names, sometimes they do create that folder. Which then cannot be deleted in a normal way, or even accessed.
4th option, shut it down completely. That said, there are times when I would leave it on to watch TV, but ended up having it turned on the entire night as I had already fallen asleep watching Netflix. When that happens, I would feel bad of myself.
avatar
dtgreene: For fun, in modern Windows, try creating (via a GUI program) a file with the name "con", or use Windows Explorer to rename a file with the name "con".
avatar
frogthroat: If you want to soft lock your MS-DOS, just type copy con con. Surprisingly enough you cannot save keyboard inputs to your keyboard.

But anyway, if a software is capable of creating folders and the folder creation is not using the standard Windows dialog, I sometimes test to create folders like CON, COM1, NUL, PRN, AUX, LPT1... If the software manufacturer has implemented their own folder creation and has not blocked those names, sometimes they do create that folder. Which then cannot be deleted in a normal way, or even accessed.
The effect I would expect for "copy con con" is that it would copy keyboard input to the screen (or the DOS terminal). That's what happens on Linux, provided that you use a tool other than cp (cp refuses to copy a file to itself, even though it would make sense in this instance). (Use Ctrl-D to type EOF so that the program will know to quit.)

I remember that cygwin would allow me to create files with those names, and when trying to delete them through WIndows Explorer would give strange error messages that didn't make any sense. (Can WSL create such files?)