Re: [GLLUG] Sound off resume resume from suspend.
Hi, On 05 Feb 2024 at 17:53:16, Andrew Black via GLLUG wrote: > I used to have a script on my WIndoze PC that switched the speaker to 0 on > resume from suspend or hibernate. It saved me embarrassment of playing > bombastic organ music in a quiet library! > > I wonder if I could do the same of Ubuntu.It is in two parts > >- Detecting when you suspend or resume (I am not bothered which!) >- Changing the volume level to 0 (or close to 0). I use something similar (with desktop shortcuts) to change the volume and toggle mute or not in Debian. This sets it to 0, to me (I think that depends of the audio configuration will work or not for you): amixer set Master 0% Regarding the suspend and resume: I know that there are scripts that are executed, but I don't know which ones right now (and might be different on Debian or Ubuntu). Hopefully someone else will know! Cheers, -- Carles Pina i Estany https://carles.pina.cat signature.asc Description: PGP signature -- GLLUG mailing list GLLUG@mailman.lug.org.uk https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug
Re: [GLLUG] British Gas DKIM failure?
Hi, On 28 Jan 2024 at 14:37:43, Marco van Beek via GLLUG wrote: > On 27/01/2024 18:08, Henrik Morsing via GLLUG wrote: > > > > I'm now getting the same from the Land Registry: > > > > I wish there was a test I could do to check what is actually wrong... > > > Okay, so this would indicate that it is more likely something wrong at your > end rather than at theirs. I think that this point, I would start to wonder > if there is anything at your end that is altering the email before it gets > to the DKIM check. this makes sense. I would also check if DKIM can be verified by, for example, mails coming from gmail.com. In my mail client: I view the headers to see the "Authentication-Results". For an email from gmail.com to my mail server with DKIM I see that it says "dkim=pass". But, note, that DMARC for gmail.com says policy "none" and for the British Gas / Land registry I think that says "policy=reject". So, I wonder, does DKIM verification always fails for Henrik? (e.g. wrong DNS lookups from DKIM, it happened to me). And, for some domains, this is a reject and other domains, is "nothing happens". [...] > Maybe something in your system is altering something in a field that is > being used by the British Gas and Land registry emails, like adding an > "EXTERNAL" into the subject line before the DKIM test? that's a good idea to check as well. For reference, an email that I am checking the headers says: Subject:From:To:Date:message-id:x-mailer-recipientid:fe +edback-id:list-unsubscribe-post:list-unsubscribe:precedence:x-mailru-msgtype:x-campaignid:rep +ly-to:MIME-Version:Content-Type So, if the subject changed before verifying DKIM, it would not pass. Cheers, -- Carles Pina i Estany https://carles.pina.cat signature.asc Description: PGP signature -- GLLUG mailing list GLLUG@mailman.lug.org.uk https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug
Re: [GLLUG] Using LLM for support answers - please don't (Was Re: British Gas DKIM failure?)
Hi, On 28 Jan 2024 at 13:23:26, Andy Smith via GLLUG wrote: > Hello, > > On Sun, Jan 28, 2024 at 12:42:20AM +0000, Carles Pina i Estany via GLLUG > wrote: > > (this is a copy-paste from a... ChatGPT conversation): > > Please don't. To clarify, that was only the list of things that could have been wrong on why opendkim reported "bad signature". To my knowledge, the list seems correct and can be usefl. I am not a professional mail sysadmin (even though I set up email servers, during years, in different environments). The rest of the email is hand typed and brain thought! Anyway, I'll not do it again. > If this was a StackOverflow site, your response would not be > permitted because you used an LLM (ChatGPT). yes, but this is not StackOverflow (so didn't think that adding 4 lines that I thought that were well explained) was a problem. Stating the source. I thought that it was a good description to help Henrik that could have happened and fix the issue. > I think that StackOverflow's reasoning for their policy is sound and > would apply here also: > > > https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/421831/temporary-policy-generative-ai-e-g-chatgpt-is-banned > > In a nutshell, any of us, including Henrik, can easily use an LLM > yet what we can't easily do without domain knowledge is tell when an > LLM is *incorrect*. I do have some (limited) domain knowledge and I thought that the 4 lines were quite correct and a good summary (else, I wouldn't go answering things that I have no idea). I might still be wrong, in this case I apologise and hope to learn. > When someone asks a question on a mailing list like this, I'd like > to think their question would be given as much respect as if it were > asked on a Stack site. This is my third email trying to help Henrik, including sharing some scripts that I use for a similar case. I really only want to help Henrik, and I used tools that I had in hand to try to explain one of the errors. I will not do it another time. Sorry for the confusion here! -- Carles Pina i Estany https://carles.pina.cat signature.asc Description: PGP signature -- GLLUG mailing list GLLUG@mailman.lug.org.uk https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug
Re: [GLLUG] British Gas DKIM failure?
Hi, On 27 Jan 2024 at 18:08:36, Henrik Morsing via GLLUG wrote: > > I'm now getting the same from the Land Registry: > > Jan 27 18:05:24 emil postfix/smtpd[734113]: DA88621F91: > client=d218-4.smtp-out.eu-west-2.amazonses.com[23.249.218.4] > Jan 27 18:05:24 emil postfix/cleanup[734121]: DA88621F91: > message-id=<010b018d4c1902e5-14919a91-2793-4c5e-8d86-4091eaeb1175-000...@eu-west-2.amazonses.com> > Jan 27 18:05:24 emil opendkim[768]: DA88621F91: > d218-4.smtp-out.eu-west-2.amazonses.com [23.249.218.4] not internal > Jan 27 18:05:24 emil opendkim[768]: DA88621F91: not authenticated > Jan 27 18:05:25 emil opendkim[768]: DA88621F91: message has signatures from > accounts.landregistry.gov.uk, amazonses.com > Jan 27 18:05:25 emil opendkim[768]: DA88621F91: > s=s7vtg5zfwt6jcj77lxzbi3rmck6i6vrp d=accounts.landregistry.gov.uk > a=rsa-sha256 SSL error:04091068:rsa routines:int_rsa_verify:bad signature > Jan 27 18:05:25 emil opendkim[768]: DA88621F91: bad signature data DKIM (signature from the server) for this email is not valid. Why? I think (this is a copy-paste from a... ChatGPT conversation): Email Tampering: The email content might have been altered in transit, causing a mismatch between the content and the signature. Incorrect Signature: The sender's mail server might have incorrectly signed the email, possibly due to a misconfiguration. DKIM Record Issues: There could be issues with the DKIM public key record in the DNS. This might include errors in the DNS entry or propagation delays. Header Modification: Some intermediate mail servers might modify headers, which can invalidate the DKIM signature. > Jan 27 18:05:25 emil opendmarc[1652567]: DA88621F91: > accounts.landregistry.gov.uk fail > Jan 27 18:05:25 emil postfix/cleanup[734121]: DA88621F91: milter-reject: > END-OF-MESSAGE from d218-4.smtp-out.eu-west-2.amazonses.com[23.249.218.4]: > 5.7.1 rejected by DMARC policy for accounts.landregistry.gov.uk; > from=<010b018d4c1902e5-14919a91-2793-4c5e-8d86-4091eaeb1175-000...@eu-west-2.amazonses.com> > to= proto=ESMTP > helo= Their DMARC policy can be seen here: https://mxtoolbox.com/SuperTool.aspx?action=dmarc%3alandregistry.gov.uk=toolpage It says that if DKIM fails it should be rejected (strict mode). Your opendmarc does this. > I wish there was a test I could do to check what is actually wrong... I don't remember, do you control your own postfix mail setup? Two ideas: -disable opendmarc - so an invalid dkim would still be allowed. I think that this is a setup that I have. Spamassassin still give good/bad points I think based on DKIM_INVALID, etc. if you used something like spamassassin -Check opendmarc configuration. I don't have it handy but https://manpages.ubuntu.com/manpages/jammy/en/man5/opendmarc.conf.5.html (so, man 5 opendmarc) suggests "CopyFailuresTo" where, somehow, maybe you could keep the failures somewhere? See them, check then manually the DKIM signature? It also has FailureReportsBcc, maybe even IgnoreHosts might be interesting? I haven't used the opendmarc options. I'd be interested in knowing how you get on. Cheers, > > Regards, > Henrik Morsing > > > On Fri, Jan 12, 2024 at 03:48:17PM +, Henrik Morsing via GLLUG wrote: > > > > Good afternoon, > > > > Not dircetly Linux, sorry, but British Gas has spent the last year sending > > me letters saying they can't email me. When I look into it, their emails > > are rejected based on a bad DKIM signature. > > > > The problem is, not receiving the email, how can I find out what the > > problem is? mxtoolbox says their setup is fine, but that surely can't check > > the signature inside one of their emails. > > > > What is slightly odd is that DMARC policy is set to none, so shouldn't > > reject anything anyway. > > > > I can't say I'm a DKIM/DMARC expert, but this is what I see: > > > > Dec 22 12:37:12 emil opendkim[768]: 2F7612233E: s=mailjet > > d=britishgas.co.uk a=rsa-sha256 SSL error:04091068:rsa > > routines:int_rsa_verify:bad signature > > Dec 22 12:37:13 emil opendmarc[3858740]: 2F7612233E: britishgas.co.uk fail > > Dec 22 12:37:13 emil postfix/cleanup[3996586]: 2F7612233E: milter-reject: > > END-OF-MESSAGE from o94.p12.mailjet.com[87.253.237.94]: 5.7.1 rejected by > > DMARC policy for britishgas.co.uk; > > from=<296f63a1.caaabphwdncaakg7asyaaycquv4aabbdggblh...@a1065858.bnc3.mailjet.com> > > to= proto=ESMTP helo= > > > > Not sure where to go from here though. Smells like their problem to me, but > > I don't want to tell them that without proof. Any hints? > > > > Regards, > > Henrik Morsing > > -- > > > > > > -- > > GLLUG mailing list > > GLLUG@mailman.lug.org.uk > > https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug > > -- > > > -- > GLLUG mailing list > GLLUG@mailman.lug.org.uk > https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug -- Carles Pina i Estany https://carles.pina.cat signature.asc Description: PGP signature -- GLLUG mailing list
Re: [GLLUG] British Gas DKIM failure?
Hi, On 17 Jan 2024 at 12:30:15, Henrik Morsing via GLLUG wrote: > On Mon, Jan 15, 2024 at 07:45:25PM +0000, Carles Pina i Estany via GLLUG > wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > Hi, > > > > > Side note, almost unrelated. > > > > In a personal/family server I have a nightly script that sends me which > > emails have been rejected by the server. Why? Postfix, in my > > configuration, rejects some emails. For example, from the Birmingham > > Zoo, bto.org, etc. so I get an email in the morning with the rejections > > of the day before and if I want to I add them in sender_access. In 1.5 > > years I have 14 domains there. > > > > When time allows, I will add the DKIM rejections as well, based on your > > case. Just in case. So thanks for sharing. I wonder if DKIM is rejecting > > some "legit" (or "expected") email. > > > > Sounds very useful, something you can share or is it top secret? Nothing top secret. It's not a public script because I have it in a repo with internal tools for the personal server. What I have detects the emails rejected by "Client host rejected: cannot find your reverse hostname" and "Client host rejected: cannot find your hostname". This is the script that parses the Postfix logs for those errors: https://gist.github.com/cpina/e97c0da58f42a0db83b3886674de4410 I call (from cron) it from this Bash script: https://gist.github.com/cpina/79b4f425facb6b97aaea4c572307de3a The email looks like this: https://gist.github.com/cpina/4c49df824742c5ae1d273170939795be The reason that I wrote it was, as I said, I set up postfix to reject emails based on the hostname (it reduced Spam) but some, very few services, have the email set up in a way that is wrong. Then I can see them and I add them in sender_access in Postfix. What I will do, some day, is make sure that emails rejected because of DMARC, are also there. So, if I expected an email from britishgas or whoever and it appears in the morning email the day after, I would know faster. Not ideal, but email seems full of not-ideal things :-) Cheers, -- Carles Pina i Estany https://carles.pina.cat signature.asc Description: PGP signature -- GLLUG mailing list GLLUG@mailman.lug.org.uk https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug
Re: [GLLUG] British Gas DKIM failure?
Hi, On 15 Jan 2024 at 18:07:08, Andy Smith via GLLUG wrote: > Hi, > > On Sun, Jan 14, 2024 at 06:06:56PM +, Marco van Beek via GLLUG wrote: > > So looking at this, and Andy's email with what he sees, it looks like his > > British Gas emails are coming from a different place to yours. His are > > coming from SalesForce, and yours are coming from Mail Jet, so I don't think > > we can draw much from that. > > I should maybe have gone a bit further back, as those last two > emails were both about the upcoming changes to the price cap, so > conceivably might have been sent from a different system than, say, > an account statement. > > I shall have a look when I'm not camped out on a datacentre floor… Side note, almost unrelated. In a personal/family server I have a nightly script that sends me which emails have been rejected by the server. Why? Postfix, in my configuration, rejects some emails. For example, from the Birmingham Zoo, bto.org, etc. so I get an email in the morning with the rejections of the day before and if I want to I add them in sender_access. In 1.5 years I have 14 domains there. When time allows, I will add the DKIM rejections as well, based on your case. Just in case. So thanks for sharing. I wonder if DKIM is rejecting some "legit" (or "expected") email. Cheers, -- Carles Pina i Estany https://carles.pina.cat signature.asc Description: PGP signature -- GLLUG mailing list GLLUG@mailman.lug.org.uk https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug
Re: [GLLUG] Read only?
Hi, On May/24/2022, Chris Bell via GLLUG wrote: > On Monday, 23 May 2022 23:05:28 BST Carles Pina i Estany via GLLUG wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Try hdparm -r 0 [device] before partitioning. > > > > Cheers, > > > Thanks, I think that has worked before, but this time it appears to have > actually died. I have now twice tried the above command for the whole device > and each partition separately, followed by fdisk, then mkfs for a single > partition, then an attempt to dd fresh data to the device, and it still shows > the original two partitions and the original data. None of the above showed > any error message, all appeared normal. I will try again later using a laptop > which has a known working internal SD card reader rather than a USB plug-in. I've had some SD Card that hdparm -r 0 was working for a "short period of time". I decided that it was just broken... (after trying with two readers, etc. etc.) Cheers, -- Carles Pina i Estany https://carles.pina.cat -- GLLUG mailing list GLLUG@mailman.lug.org.uk https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug
Re: [GLLUG] Read only?
Hi, Try hdparm -r 0 [device] before partitioning. Cheers, On May/23/2022, Chris Bell via GLLUG wrote: > Hello, > I have a MicroSD card that has been used in a RaspbrryPi that appears to have > been corrupted in an attempt to re-use it, and now shows as read only. No > great monetary value, but I could not find any software that appears able to > re-partition any device, whatever its value, once set to read only. Is that > correct, or is this just a dead device? > -- > Chris Bell > Website chrisbell.org.uk > > > > -- > GLLUG mailing list > GLLUG@mailman.lug.org.uk > https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug -- Carles Pina i Estany https://carles.pina.cat -- GLLUG mailing list GLLUG@mailman.lug.org.uk https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug
Re: [GLLUG] basic IPv6 questions
Hi, On Oct/06/2021, Fred Youhanaie via GLLUG wrote: > > > On 03/10/2021 20:12, Carles Pina i Estany via GLLUG wrote: > > > > I have human parsing issues! I read the output of "ifconfig" and "route" > > without any effort. I need some effort for the output of "ip a", "ip r" > > and I miss some parameters sometimes. > > You may find the "-c" option helpful, e.g. "ip -c a" or "ip -c r". The > colour output does help me with the dense output :-) That's a good tip! Thanks to all the comments in this thread. I'm still a bit behind on properly-reading the emails but getting there! :-) -- Carles Pina i Estany https://carles.pina.cat -- GLLUG mailing list GLLUG@mailman.lug.org.uk https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug
Re: [GLLUG] basic IPv6 questions
Hi Andy, On Oct/03/2021, Andy Smith via GLLUG wrote: > On Sun, Oct 03, 2021 at 02:57:51PM +0200, Carles Pina i Estany via GLLUG > wrote: > > I have a Raspberry pi connected to a BT router that recently has > > "switched" to ipv6 only (yay?!). This is helping me to test a Gandi > > server ipv6 configuration. > > > > Raspberry pi: /sbin/ifconfig eth0: > > First of all you should get into the habit of using "ip address" and > "ip route" commands instead of "ifconfig" and "route". [...] > So, I understand that there may be a muscle memory issue with I have solved some muscle memory with "alias" :-) Not an excuse, you are 100% right, just for a Sunday laugh: I have human parsing issues! I read the output of "ifconfig" and "route" without any effort. I need some effort for the output of "ip a", "ip r" and I miss some parameters sometimes. It's about 20 years that I moved from "pine" to "mutt" and I still use "p" to start "mutt": carles@pinux:~$ alias p alias p='LANG=en_GB.UTF8 mutt' carles@pinux:~$ (my system's locale is in Catalan but I prefer mutt in English) I've followed with interest your email (THANKS EVER SO MUCH!). I'll add some comments in some places with some small question or for me to confirm that I understood some parts correctly... > immediately reaching for "ifconfig" etc — I experienced the same > myself and still do with some of the "netstat" replacements — but > there's nothing to be done about that except try to learn the new > tools! > > > eth0: flags=4163 mtu 1500 > > inet6 fe80::56d8:5a6c:fc11:16f1 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x20 > > inet6 2a00:23c6:2c01:b801:2817:ffe3:d3aa:5d8c prefixlen 64 > > scopeid 0x0 > > ether b8:27:eb:b0:9d:76 txqueuelen 1000 (Ethernet) > > > Gandi server: /sbin/ifconfig eth0: > > eth0: flags=4163 mtu 1500 > > inet 213.167.241.144 netmask 255.255.254.0 broadcast > > 213.167.241.255 > > inet6 2001:4b98:dc2:53:216:3eff:fe82:b1fb prefixlen 64 scopeid > > 0x0 > > inet6 fe80::216:3eff:fe82:b1fb prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x20 > > ether 00:16:3e:82:b1:fb txqueuelen 1000 (Ethernet) > > > -inet6 2a00 and 2001 ipv6 addresses: they are global ipv6 routeable from > > the internet (google.com is 20aa:..., dns.google is 2001:...). > > Yes. As said below by you and thanks to "sipcalc 2000::/3": Anything from 2000::::::: to 3fff::::::: belongs to the global unicast addresses. > > by the DHCP server of each network (or static configuration). > > Yes, although dynamic IPv6 configuration is more often done by > StateLess Address Autoconfiguration (SLAAC) rather than DHCP. SLAAC I suspect that 20 years ago I studied this at uni. Sadly I've forgotten many things and I think that we never did a hands on setting up of an ipv6 network :-( > works through announcements by the network segment's router(s) > telling devices on that network segment which addresses they can > choose and what their default gateway should be. > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPv6_address#Stateless_address_autoconfiguration I've read also the linked (and specially the first two paragraphs): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neighbor_Discovery_Protocol If the Raspberry pi + BT router used SLAAC is this more or less what happens? -Raspberry pi sends a broadcast using NDP probably type "Router Solicitation (Type 133)" (https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4861.html#section-4.1) -Router probably answers with a "Router Advertisement (Type 134)" (https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4861.html#section-4.2) The Router Advertisement includes the IP of the router (in the "Source Address"?) > DHCPv6 does exist though so it is possible that this is used in > addition or instead of SLAAC. good to know! When I had to setup a Linux box in a LAN I sometimes use isc-dhcp-server. If I wanted to setup ipv6 devices with SLAAC: what would be the way to go? For example, the last time that I had to do this I used isc-dhcp-server for very basic things like: -Setup the DNS of the clients -For some of the clients a static assigned IP (e.g. host with MAC address X is always the IP Y) -Setup the gateway of the clients (some clients didn't have a gateway, some had a gateway) Is this something that could be done using SLAAC? Or should be done with a DHCPv6 server? > > -Any difference between 2a00 and 2001? Any other addresses like this? > > They are conceptually as similar as 12.0.0.0/8 and 185.0.0.0/8 in > IPv4m, for example. Just different globally routable address blocks. >
[GLLUG] basic IPv6 questions
Hi GLLUG, If I remember correctly I've seen excellent threads here about ipv6 (and ipv4 :-) ). I'm now (yes, very late) starting to use ipv6 myself and I thought of asking a few things to learn it a bit better. I have a Raspberry pi connected to a BT router that recently has "switched" to ipv6 only (yay?!). This is helping me to test a Gandi server ipv6 configuration. Raspberry pi: /sbin/ifconfig eth0: eth0: flags=4163 mtu 1500 inet6 fe80::56d8:5a6c:fc11:16f1 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x20 inet6 2a00:23c6:2c01:b801:2817:ffe3:d3aa:5d8c prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x0 ether b8:27:eb:b0:9d:76 txqueuelen 1000 (Ethernet) I've also have a Gandi server with ipv4 and ipv6 (I've been setting up the ipv6 parts: enabling it on postfix, SPF, nginx SSL certs using the ipv6 binding port as well, etc.). Gandi server: /sbin/ifconfig eth0: eth0: flags=4163 mtu 1500 inet 213.167.241.144 netmask 255.255.254.0 broadcast 213.167.241.255 inet6 2001:4b98:dc2:53:216:3eff:fe82:b1fb prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x0 inet6 fe80::216:3eff:fe82:b1fb prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x20 ether 00:16:3e:82:b1:fb txqueuelen 1000 (Ethernet) My understading / questions all mixed up (please correct me if I'm wrong, or confirm?): -inet6 2a00 and 2001 ipv6 addresses: they are global ipv6 routeable from the internet (google.com is 20aa:..., dns.google is 2001:...). by the DHCP server of each network (or static configuration). -Any difference between 2a00 and 2001? Any other addresses like this? -From the server I would be able to ping 2a00:23c6:2c01:b801:2817:ffe3:d3aa:5d8c if BT wanted (can I ask them? is it in the router configuration? Doing a traceroute I don't quite get into the local home router IP, I don't think so) -fe80:: are local in the network IPs. For Gandi: this gets generated out of the MAC address. And not for the Pi, why not? (how to set this up?) About the routing: In the Raspberry Pi I see: pi@raspberrypi:~ $ /sbin/route -n -6 Kernel IPv6 routing table DestinationNext Hop Flag Met Ref Use If ::1/128:: U256 2 0 lo 2a00:23c6:2c01:b801::/64 :: U202 1 0 eth0 fe80::/64 :: U256 5 0 eth0 fe80::/64 :: U256 1 0 tun0 ::/0 fe80::ee6c:9aff:fea3:a231 UG 202 5 0 eth0 ::1/128:: Un 0 7 0 lo 2a00:23c6:2c01:b801:2817:ffe3:d3aa:5d8c/128 :: Un 0 3 0 eth0 fe80::56d8:5a6c:fc11:16f1/128 :: Un 0 4 0 eth0 fe80::e573:8e71:2128:3a11/128 :: Un 0 2 0 tun0 ff00::/8 :: U256 6 0 eth0 ff00::/8 :: U256 1 0 tun0 ::/0 :: !n -1 1 0 lo pi@raspberrypi:~ $ traceroute -n -6 google.com traceroute to google.com (2a00:1450:4009:817::200e), 30 hops max, 80 byte packets 1 2a00:23c6:2c01:b801:ee6c:9aff:fea3:a231 5.056 ms 4.732 ms 4.549 ms I'm not quite matching the first hop with the routing table. Why not? In ipv4 I would be able to see the gateway there (unless the gateway is not answering ICMP, but if it's fe80::ee6c:9aff:fea3:a231 it does answer ICMP). If you have some good resource that answers all of this: please let me know and I'll happily read. I've been Googling a bit and not finding everything. Thank you every so much! -- Carles Pina i Estany https://carles.pina.cat -- GLLUG mailing list GLLUG@mailman.lug.org.uk https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug
Re: [GLLUG] Teddy bear principle
Hi, On Dec/23/2020, Andrew Black via GLLUG wrote: > Some time ago someone suggested the idea of solving a tech problem by > explaining something to you teddy. He is very stupid so it makes sure you [...] > explain it well. Sometimes the process of explaining makes you find the > thing the clue you have missed. > I cant put my finger on where it came from (does it matter). Google is > taking me to all sorts of sites like "how to make teddies" and "why teddies > are called ted". Other people have already sent good links or comments. Just one more: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rubber_duck_debugging Cheers, -- Carles Pina i Estany https://carles.pina.cat -- GLLUG mailing list GLLUG@mailman.lug.org.uk https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug
