DesertCreosote

I’m one of the admins who manage CrowdStrike at my company.

We have all automatic updates disabled, because when they were enabled (according to the CrowdStrike best practices guide they gave us), they pushed out a version with a bug that overwhelmed our domain servers. Now we test everything through multiple environments before things make it to production, with at least two weeks of testing before we move a version to the next environment.

This was a channel file update, and per our TAM and account managers in our meeting after this happened, there’s no way to stop that file from being pushed, or to delay it. Supposedly they’ll be adding that functionality in now.

Yes, CrowdStrike says they don’t need to do conventional AV definitions updates, but the channel file updates sure seem similar to me.

The file they pushed out consisted of all zeroes, which somehow corrupted their agent and caused the BSOD. I wasn’t on the meeting where they explained how this happened to my company; I was one of the people woken up to deal with the initial issue, and they explained this later to the rest of my team and our leadership while I was catching up on missed sleep.

I would have expected their agent to ignore invalid updates, which would have prevented this whole thing, but this isn’t the first time I’ve seen examples of bad QA and/or their engineering making assumptions about how things will work. For the amount of money they charge, their product is frustratingly incomplete. And asking them to fix things results in them asking you to submit your request to their Ideas Portal, so the entire world can vote on whether it’s a good idea, and if enough people vote for it they will “consider” doing it. My company spends a fortune on their tool every year, and we haven’t been able to even get them to allow non-case-sensitive searching, or searching for a list of hosts instead of individuals.

Speaking as someone who manages CrowdStrike in my company, we do stagger updates and turn off all the automatic things we can.

This channel file update wasn’t something we can turn off or control. It’s handled by CrowdStrike themselves, and we confirmed that in discussions with our TAM and account manager at CrowdStrike while we were working on remediation.

VASAviation has the audio of this, along with a radar view of what happened and video from the ground. It was very, very close, and appears to be completely the controller’s fault.

https://youtu.be/KmI6pVTjCt0?si=Q39JOnyE37QYlCwB

Have you considered calling the locating service, get them to mark the entire yard, and then taking pictures so you know areas are okay to dig in going forward? I’ve been considering doing that for my yard just so I know where I can safely landscape.

On the off chance that you’re actually asking, there have been studies that have shown the regret rate for transitioning is less than 1%.

Here’s an article about a recent study which tracked people up to 23 years post-transition, showing median regret as 0 out of 100.

Now, you might be thinking to yourself “but that’s just one study, with around 200 participants, and the results were so uniform it caused issues with the statistics. Maybe it’s wrong.” Well, here is a meta-analysis of 27 additional studies, with almost 8,000 participants, which also shows regret rates are <1%.

Hope that helps.

I grumbled about ServiceNow for years, and then my company switched to Cherwell.

Now I’d switch back to ServiceNow in a heartbeat.

But hey, this is america get your cash money.

Yes, I'm sure this is actually about the money for her, and not an attempt to ensure the company is punished in some way for her son's death. Grieving parents are famously more concerned with payouts than making sure negligence that killed their children doesn't happen again. /s

The responsibility for a safe working environment is entirely on the company here, and if they have failed to provide it they should be held liable and pay damages.

I'm not currently active on dating apps, but when I last was a couple years ago, it wasn't a problem. I'm findable online, since I have a blog and several professional profiles set up to make it easier to pass HR checks when applying for jobs, so that may have helped. But overall it hasn't been a concern with any of my partners.

He didn't ignore basic gun safety. Firearms on movie sets are not the same as firearms everywhere else. There is supposed to be a dedicated person who is directly responsible for ensuring live ammunition is never, ever brought close to a prop gun. I've posted this elsewhere at one point, but as somebody who has worked on productions with blank-firing guns, the cast and crew are not allowed to inspect, touch, or come near any firearm on set apart from the shortest time required for the scene. The firearms are secured before and after the scene, and there should never, ever be a chance for live ammunition to get inside a prop. The armorer guarantees the gun is safe, and are the ones responsible for it.

The armorer for this production appears to not have followed those protocols, and that's where Baldwin's potential culpability is-- not as an actor who shot somebody, but as a producer who should have had better oversight of the armorer.

"It's only 13% and not 100%, so it doesn't count!"

The Supreme Court blocked his attempt last year to forgive debt for another 43 million people, which was set to take effect before repayments started back up. He's trying to help but is being blocked by conservatives who want him to fail so Trump can be reelected.

Leverage is one of my favorites. The reboot is pretty good as well.