Windows server 2008, a very small DDoS is able to kill my server
I am under DDoS. What can I do?
Hump, Rump, Lump, Bump I’m referring to the similar definitions of these four nouns – something raised and rounded.  Why do these four rhyming words have similar meanings?  I have not found very specific sources for these words on the  and . Hump is “probably from Dutch homp.” Rump is “from a Scandinavian source,” “from Old Norse rumpr” ultimately from Proto-Germanic “rumpo.” Lump is “perhaps from a Scandinavian source” and finally, Bump is “perhaps from Scandinavian,” “probably of North Germanic origin.”   Could these words come from the same root? Other than the fact that they all might come from northern Europe, the only hint I have in this direction is the following from , tracing the origin of Hump through Dutch, Middle Low German, Old Saxon and Proto-Germanic, to Proto-Indo-European *kumb-, *kumbʰ- (“curved”). Could this PIE root, which is not given in these online sources for any of the other three words, be a common root to all four words? I find myself looking at other –ump words and “seeing” a curved or rounded line: jump (a curved trajectory), grump (a downturned mouth), pump (the action of the pump handle), clump (a rounded clod of earth, not sharp), etc. Am I just seeing this because the words sound similar, or is there something more to my tendency? For example, the  suggests the origin of jump is "perhaps onomatopoeic (cf. bump)" although this view is not echoed on Wiktionary. Is it possible that these words do all share a common root and are simply onomatopoeic variations of each other? Are there other pairs or groups of words like these in English? (Wham! Bam! Ka-blam!) Does     this phenomenon have a name? How do you configure proxy settings in the Ubuntu Server or Minimal (CLI) versions using the terminal? I would like to know where to find the source code of Ubuntu. I'd like to see how far it is "open source". Is there a difference between DR/evil and DR/unholy? When is it correct to use "yourself" and "myself" (versus "you" and "me")? I'm confused by why people use the following:     It's up to yourself.   Rather than:     It's up to you.   Another example of this would be:     Please feel free to contact ourselves if you have any problems.   Rather than:     Please feel free to contact us if you have any problems.   Are both of these correct?  Is there any reason for using the former? Punctuation with units I remember reading somewhere that if a unit is abbreviated as one character, there must not be a space between the number and the unit (e.g., 5m, 26K). If the unit is abbreviated as two or more Characters, there must be a space between the number and the unit (e.g., "10 km", "USD 5").   Can you please help me find the source again? Is this recommendation correct? Where does the idiom "beating around the bush" come from? Where does the idiom "beating around the bush" come from? I have a question about the following passage on pg. 89 of Zee's QFT in a nutshell:     At first sight, what Dirac wanted does not make sense. The equation is supposed to have the form "some linear combination of $\partial_\mu$ acting on some field $\psi$ is equal to some constant times the field." Denote the linear combination by $c^\mu\partial_\mu$. If the $c^\mu$'s are four ordinary numbers, then the four-vector $c^\mu$ defines some direction and the equation cannot be Lorentz invariant.   The simplest equation I can construct that he is referring to is  $$(c^{\mu}\partial_{\mu}-m)\phi(x)=0, $$  for $m&gt;0$. Taking $\phi(x)\rightarrow\phi(\Lambda^{-1}x)$, and $c^{\mu}\rightarrow\Lambda^{\mu}_{\ \ \nu}c^{\nu}$. Then, the left term transforms like   \begin{align*} \Lambda^{\mu}_{\ \ \nu}c^{\nu}(\Lambda^{-1})^{\sigma}_{\ \ \mu}\partial_{\sigma}\phi(\Lambda^{-1}x) &amp;= \delta^{\sigma}_{\ \ \nu}c^{\nu}\partial_{\sigma}\phi(\Lambda^{-1}x)\\ &amp;=c^{\sigma}\partial_{\sigma}\phi(\Lambda^{-1}x). \end{align*}  Then, we have that   $$ (c^{\sigma}\partial_{\sigma}-m)\phi(\Lambda^{-1}x)=0.$$  But doesn't this show that the equation is Lorentz-invariant? Why should the Standard Model be renormalizable? Effective theories like Little Higgs models or Nambu-Jona-Lasinio model are non-renormalizable and there is no problem with it, since an effective theory does not need to be renormalizable. These theories are valid until a scale $\Lambda$ (ultraviolet cutoff), after this scale an effective theory need a UV completion, a more "general" theory.  The Standard Model, as an effective theory of particle physics, needs a more general theory that addresses the phenomena beyond the Standard Model (an UV completion?). So, why should the Standard Model be renormalizable? onChange event doesn't trigger How does a pharmacy discount card work? stl::multimap - how do i get groups of data? Multimap essentially has groups of data sorted by the key. I want a method by which I could access these individual groups and get their aggregate values. For example, in a std::multimap&lt; string, int &gt; I store   {"Group1", 1},  {"Group1", 2},  {"Group1", 3},   {"Group2", 10},  {"Group2", 11},  {"Group2", 12}   Having stored these values, I should be able to iterate this multimap and get the aggregate values of each "group". Problem is there aren't any functions defined in STL to access MultiMaps in such a way. I could use lower_bound, upper_bound to manually iterate the multimap and total the group's contents, but I am hoping there could be better ways already defined in STL ? Can anyone propose a solution as to how I could get the aggregate values for a group in the above example. Can I use lens brand X on interchangeable lens camera brand Y? I've got some lenses of brand X, but I've just got a new camera of brand Y. How can I tell if it's possible to use my lenses on my camera? I accept that I may lose a lot of automatic functionality like autofocus, aperture control and metering when using an adapter to connect the two. EEA Family Permit: No appointments are currently available for this location My Austrian husband and I will be travelling to the UK in April 2019 so I've applied for the EEA (just like before). I can't really wait with my application till January (3 months until the trip) because we'll be abroad in February and I need my passport back for that.  Upon filling out the application I saw some appointments on Dec, 27 that I couldn't book because we'll be on vacation in another country that week.  For the last three days, there have been no appointments available at all, I keep getting the message "No appointments are currently available for this location" (that's for Vienna).  I have contacted the visa4uk support per Email. They told me to use the approved Internet browser and closed the ticket. I replied to their Email asking for further help since my issue wasn't of technical nature (I use an approved browser), but they don't seem to reply anymore.  So how can the situation with unavailable appointments be resolved?  13.12.2018 Edit after comment: My national residence permit is not the Article 10 card. Do spice containers need to be hermetic? Density of finite rank operator in compact operators on Hilbert spaces Showing that Y has a uniform distribution if Y=F(X) where F is the cdf of continuous X Let $X$ be a random variable with a continuous and strictly increasing c.d.f. function $F$ (so that the quantile function $F^{−1}$ is well-deﬁned). Deﬁne a new random variable $Y$ by $Y = F(X)$. Show that $Y$ has a uniform distribution on the interval $[0, 1]$.  My initial thought is that $Y$ is distributed on the interval $[0,1]$ because this is the range of $F$.  But how do you show that it is uniform? PCB opaque coating for anti reverse engineering? Im trying to find a coating for my PCB in order to protect it from reverse engineering. I want it opaque, non-conductive and with a low thermal resistance.  Basically I do not want that someone replicates my circuit easily. I´ve beens searching a lot on coatings but did't find anything that suits to all my requirement. Anyone with an idea? Proving $6^n - 1$ is always divisible by $5$ by induction I'm trying to prove the following, but can't seem to understand it. Can somebody help?     Prove $6^n - 1$ is always divisible by $5$ for $n \geq 1$.   What I've done:  Base Case: $n = 1$: $6^1 - 1 = 5$, which is divisible by $5$ so TRUE.  Assume true for $n = k$, where $k \geq 1$: $6^k - 1 = 5P$.  Should be true for $n = k + 1$  $6^{k + 1} - 1 = 5Q$  $= 6 \cdot 6^k - 1$  However, I am unsure on where to go from here. Making some tests in Windows XP for customizing a user interface in QGIS 1.8 (see ), I have unchecked, among other options, the Settings Menu. This means that, after restarting QGIS, there's no way of recovering the older settings because there is not already a Setting Menu. So, I cannot reload any ini file.  For your information, as a precaution, previously I have saved in a folder both the original ini file, with all the options, and the customized ini file with only some options (of course, not included here the necessary Settings Menu).  Before reinstalling QGIS (version 1,8), I would like to try other smarter options if there's any. Where and what does QGIS look at where this applications starts?