Jump to content

Lost In Cyberia

Active Members
  • Posts

    117
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Cyberia!
  • Interests
    writing, reading, philosophy, the unknown, exploration, solving puzzles, crypto, hashes, politics etc..

Recent Profile Visitors

3,512 profile views

Lost In Cyberia's Achievements

Newbie

Newbie (1/14)

  1. I use the command line irc client, irssi, and I frequent an Amateur radio irc, the TwiT.tv irc, and the nouveau irc. all three very lively
  2. What the hell?? So...how is this even possible? The network in my house, is reading -63 dDm... So according to the wiki, that's about 1 nanoWatt. I'm not an electrician obviously, but how on earth can my wifi router only put out 1 nanoWatt?? That sounds microscopically small? Doesn't the radiating antenna need lots of power to pump out that wifi frequency throughout my house? It sounds really bizarre that the power from the wifi router is only operating with such a small weak signal. Infact looking up on the chart on the wiki, it shows that WiFI bands b/g/n use about 200 miliWatts. and cell phone transmitters put out 500 miliwatts. That's a pretty significant jump over the reading of 1 nanowatt that I'm reading from my router Why such a huge difference?... Just a bit confused as how the range can be so wide.
  3. So I noticed that all wifi analyzers, and readers, display the signal strength of wireless hotspots, and wireless connections in decibels, but in miliwatts. Furthermore, no matter what signal I look at it's always a negative number. I've seen ranges all the way from -23 down to -78 dBm. At first this confused me as I never saw any positive numbers, I assumed that the negative was bad no matter what... But thinking about it.. One the receiving end of an analyzer..the signal strength must ALWAYS be negative right? If I put it like this, you can't hear something louder than it was originally sent. So if the wifi router is sending a signal out at 0dBm, and my analyzer picks it up at 0dBm, then it received a 100% signal, but more likely it'll be reduced, hence the negative numbers.. So my main question is if the wifi transmitter was sending out a signal at like 6dBm, and my analyzer picks it up reasonally well, would it still have a positive like maybe 3 dBM? How would the receiver know that the transmitter was sending it at 6dBm in the first place? It doesn't know the transmitters starting power so it would assume that anything that the transmitter is sending would be 0dBm right? Does this sound about right?
  4. Wow, Digip, fantastic and hopefully not time consuming for you, explanation! I wasn't the one who requested it, but this is a benefit to us all...
  5. Cipher downgrade during negotiation?
  6. Honestly, this guy hamzaabdullahmoh should be banned...
  7. Furthermore...do any of these firmware support UEFI? And more specifically, secureboot?
  8. Lol, I dub it the "smoke 'em out" method
  9. Hey everyone, while taking my morning and going through the GRUB manual: Grub Install I came across two questions that are picking at me. This is in regards to an MBR partitioned disk. There are apparently two "main" methods to installing GRUB to an MBR style disk. We can insert GRUB after the leading chunk of MBR on the disk, and before the first partition. Or we can install GRUB to a specified partition itself. (Usually the first). Do i have this right? So my questions are thus: 1. If the first option is chosen, to insert the bootloader after the MBR, would we still have a /boot/grub directory? Or would this directory, along with the core GRUB img, (/boot/grub/i386-pc/core.img) be installed then in the area after the MBR? 2. Does this imply that having a /boot/grub directory and general grub files, mean that GRUB is installed on your partition? 3. I then read from other sources that GRUB is installed IN the MBR? Is this just a difference in syntax? It sounds like it's different than doing it after the MBR and before the 1st partition. 4. If you put /boot onto a separate partition. Does this work the same way as it being installed on say /dev/sda1 or /dev/sda2? Thanks everyone, hope these make sense...
  10. Most likely network-manager? Not 100% sure on your system. Run : sudo systemctl status networking.service and then run: sudo systemctl status systemd-networkd.service One of those should be active and the other should be dead. Whichever is actice is most likely handling your interfaces
  11. Lol, Cooper, why am I not suprised :P I'm currently using openbox as a DE so it's fairly minimal as well, but the OS I use comes with Terminator, which in turn uses xterm by default. To supplement what you said Cooper, I present this: http://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/93376/which-terminal-type-am-i-using
  12. Hmm I see... So, most "terminal emulators" (guake, terminator, termite etc..) will always use some other predefined "terminal type" (xterm, vt100, ) I'm assuming that xterm though was at once point a terminal emulator as well though, because it's listed here as an application: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Category:Terminal_emulators I'm also assuming that the terminal emulator applications can support multiple and different terminal types? So in general, we people fuss over what terminal emulator they like best.. does this mean that they're actually arguing about the terminal type that the terminal application is using? Does it also mean that, besides graphically, that in general terminal emulators are pretty much the same? If two terminal emulators are both using xterm...doesn't that mean that both terminal emulators are providing the same functionality? What do you use Cooper? Just curious...
  13. Hey everyone, So I'm a bit confused about the settings of linux terminals. I have two terminals installed on my system. I can open either. I have Guake and I have terminator. But when I do echo $TERM, on both terminals it displays that the terminal is xterm. It was my understanding that xterm is a much older console, so why are both terminals displaying that they're xterm? Are they both using the xterm source or something? I don't have the experience, but do other terminals like rxvt, wterm, konsole etc... do they all use xterm as well? Why does xterm seem like the "base" for other terminals? Are these other terminals, more like wrappers over the original xterm code? Thanks for the responses ahead of time
  14. Cooper, your devotion to providing quality, well thoughtout answers to our questions is remarkable...You really should start like a blog or compedium of all of the information you provide to the curious minded noobies like us lol. Seriously though I'd hate to think all of this information you take the time to write and think about, going to waste... Anyway thanks for the answer, that cleared up a lot! You say: Team A is potentially legally fucked - the maker of the original device can sue them claiming Team A somehow had access to confidential documents so they must disappear Wow... seriously? This is a lot of shit to go through and do, to make a driver...? It actually is surprising that anyone would go through this and potentially screw up their lives to create a driver. The whole process seems like a very "Don't ask, Don't tell" mentality. Has there been large scale crackdowns by the venders against this?
×
×
  • Create New...