This guy has already proven that he will break the law.
No he hasn't. He wasn't convicted, so the judge considers that what he did didn't break her interpretation of the law.
The guy has already been proven that he can't be trusted, so why work with him.
He hasn't been placed in a position of trust anymore than anyone else, so he has not proven anything. On the contrary, the Judge remarked that he has a phenomenal future ahead of him.
By working for the police department, he can write the systems for them, then later leave and hack their system.
Nobody trusts anybody in the police department. That's important and that's how you fight corruption. He will fit in well there.
I'm not sure how 'checks and balances' would have prevented it except maybe to not hire nutjobs.
Perhaps if the system backed itself up to an independent system run by a co-admin, with separate access controls, then it could have been prevented. That wouldn't be so hard and I would say it's reasonable to do in a mission critical situation.
He would have snapped either way, they should be thankful he did not do more damage.
No matter what you do, you can't stop stupidity, madness, hatred and malice. If someone is clever enough or in a position of trust, as inevitably someone has to be, this can happen and you can't always predict it. So the problem is not that a disgruntled employee pulled the plug, but that appropriate checks and balances were not in place. If they were, no individual at all would have been given that sort of power. For a single person to bring down a system is the system's fault.
Seriously. Why are these systems not using proper, redundant, and backed-up RBAC?
If everybody was clever and did the right thing all the time we wouldn't have reason to sack anyone or need to do checks on people before employing them. Mediocrity abounds!
So we didn't see a sufficient level of beta-testing during the test-period and many bugs are only filed when the release has already been made. So one option that we considered was: "Let's not call 8.04 the LTS, let's call 8.04.1 the LTS", so many people would upgrade who wouldn't use a beta and you get better feedback. So that's something we might do differently with the next LTS.
Better do it differently next time. I upgraded to LTS Ubuntu on the wife's laptop when it came out and we had stability problems with it for ages. She was the last person I wanted beta-testing a linux distro! Ouch!
..until it's ion-propelled, RADAR navigated, coming complete with a charged particle beam and a death ray as standard safety features against enemy vehicles (eg: anyone who dares to race you at the traffic lights).
If I get it right, the EPA is allowed to be given authority to do things as long as they have no real effect? Of course the EPA is going to have a profound effect on every sector of the economy. If you curtail CO2 emissions you are basically affecting every step of production delivery and consumption of most goods. That is, after all, the gravity of the situation.
WTF is the EPA for anyway?
OTOH this is looking like an episode of Yes Minister, with the approach of overdoing a popular idea to make sure it sinks.
Obviously I struck a bit of a sensitive spot here. Couldn't resist replying.
being completely ignorant of what management is doing and what is driving their decisions.
Actually I'm not ignorant of what drives their decisions (our management that is). They see their role as not to provide solutions (which would mean taking responsibility for them) but to outsource everything so they have minimal legal liability if something goes wrong. That's why they are walking around with cheque books, attending dinners and seminars and getting seduced by glossy brochures. They are customers, and they buy whatever gets sold to them.
Our IT department simply does not have the expertise to provide customized solutions for the organization, but as a matter of pride they fight like mad dogs when this is implied.
But the reality is (especially in IT), most managers HAVE DONE YOUR JOB
They haven't. I'm not an IT manager and I don't work in an IT department. Nonetheless I am aware of the goings on in their department.
and there's a good chance - especially with your attitude - that they're still better at it than you.
Again, I don't think their IT competency is at all up to scratch, and I think this situation is more widespread than you care to believe. Their incompetence in technical matters is compensated by political savvy, particularly in perpetuating the belief in the CEO that they are indispensable.
It is very easy, when one is in charge of making spending decisions, to take the lazy approach and just follow minimum standards such as 'take three bids and go for the cheapest' (and many won't even go that far). Usually nobody is checking whether you did proper research on the problem or the proposed solutions beforehand and it's not hard to make it look as though you did - just quote the papers that the sales rep gave you.
IT and other fields are the same in this respect. If you are incompetent or feel vulnerable, it's easier to go for Fisher-Price and blame Fisher-Price when the thing doesn't work. Saves having to work out what would have been better, having to employ people who know what they're doing, and then ending up being replaced by the guy you employed.
I know I'm not a professional manager, and I haven't been to management school, but some things are just plain obvious. The things that drive people are either the desire to be the best, to do one's best and to rise on merit, or to survive and do whatever it takes to prevent yourself from being usurped. The latter are easy prey for sales reps.
Actually I got some flak from other students because of that, but I wonder how many of those who gave me some got burnt out.
Well the advice I was given was by a dentist whose son had burn out from his software analyst job. He just didn't have any outside hobbies and had enough. Would have been better to have a life outside to start with. I don't know the research data on it (if there is any) but I am sure that computer science / engineering jobs have an over-representation of one or another personality trait, probably something which lends itself to people with narrow interests. Anyway thanks for your considered response.
After spending 8+ hours in a cubicle writing code, the last thing I'd want to do at the end of the day is come home and write more code.
Agreed. But OTOH I followed some advice long ago that went something like "whatever your passion in life is, don't let it be what you do for a living". It sounds counter-intuitive (and you may argue it is stupid), but the logic is that if you're passionate about programming, then it will find its way into anything you do. Better to get into some other profession first and have expertise in it. Pretty soon you'll find yourself making bits and pieces of code each day that fit in with your regular work, at the behest of your boss (or as a side business).
I'm not a master programmer by any means, but I've never stopped coding since I was twelve and now I'm making a good deal extra money at my job with my coding projects, but I can dictate how much I do. It's enough for it never to get boring.
I think the mistake is not clearly explaining to the masses that computers are complicated systems that require regular "check ups" that any user can perform themselves
Actually, computers shouldn't require any checkups that users should perform, apart from having the monitor wiped clean, maybe cleaning out the interior (in an enterprise environment this should be systematic but it almost never happens), and maintaining keyboards and mice.
Deciding to use a computer in the first place is meant to be a labour/money/time saving step, over all. People in workplaces do not assume responsibility for maintaining anything. Cars are fleet cars, to take your example, and they have scheduled maintenance that the employee, ideally, never notices.
I know that in reality, Windows PC's need local maintenance, good habits and so forth. This shouldn't be the case, and it isn't the case if you lock the computer down so much that it's hardly usable. Linux and Mac PC's are much easier to tighten up without impacting on usability. The problem with Windows PC's is people are used to doing too much on them and without doing what people do (installing free-fun-game-trojans) they get bored.
Vista is a problem because it's so greedy for hardware that the cost of deployment is ridiculous for practically no gain.
Did you intend for this to be a constructive comment?
Not really, but I mean, if you were a fly on the wall of most places, they aren't properly set up machines (they are minimally set up out-of-the-box setups) so I don't think it's 'simple' as such although everything is easy if you know how.
Slashdot Mirror
This guy has already proven that he will break the law.
No he hasn't. He wasn't convicted, so the judge considers that what he did didn't break her interpretation of the law.
The guy has already been proven that he can't be trusted, so why work with him.
He hasn't been placed in a position of trust anymore than anyone else, so he has not proven anything. On the contrary, the Judge remarked that he has a phenomenal future ahead of him.
By working for the police department, he can write the systems for them, then later leave and hack their system.
Nobody trusts anybody in the police department. That's important and that's how you fight corruption. He will fit in well there.
Oh great. I'm twenty and I'm comparitively useless and old. That's so depressing. :(
Now you just have to grow your hair long and look depressed and you too can be like him.
Posting to clear moderation because I was brainless and didn't get the joke.
Posting to thank you because I wish all moderators were as honest. OTOH also you were wise because you probably would have been down-metamoderated.
Honestly - your name isn't a secret...
It is to people who don't know it.
You can double the cost of your $700 PC.
Microsoft don't care whether you love or hate their flagship OS as long as you pay them money one way or another.
I'm not sure how 'checks and balances' would have prevented it except maybe to not hire nutjobs.
Perhaps if the system backed itself up to an independent system run by a co-admin, with separate access controls, then it could have been prevented. That wouldn't be so hard and I would say it's reasonable to do in a mission critical situation.
He would have snapped either way, they should be thankful he did not do more damage.
No matter what you do, you can't stop stupidity, madness, hatred and malice. If someone is clever enough or in a position of trust, as inevitably someone has to be, this can happen and you can't always predict it. So the problem is not that a disgruntled employee pulled the plug, but that appropriate checks and balances were not in place. If they were, no individual at all would have been given that sort of power. For a single person to bring down a system is the system's fault.
Seriously. Why are these systems not using proper, redundant, and backed-up RBAC?
If everybody was clever and did the right thing all the time we wouldn't have reason to sack anyone or need to do checks on people before employing them. Mediocrity abounds!
So they're one ahead of your average /. reade
Or your average computer which can only count to one.
So we didn't see a sufficient level of beta-testing during the test-period and many bugs are only filed when the release has already been made. So one option that we considered was: "Let's not call 8.04 the LTS, let's call 8.04.1 the LTS", so many people would upgrade who wouldn't use a beta and you get better feedback. So that's something we might do differently with the next LTS.
Better do it differently next time. I upgraded to LTS Ubuntu on the wife's laptop when it came out and we had stability problems with it for ages. She was the last person I wanted beta-testing a linux distro! Ouch!
Do we get to choose which particular English speakers we send there? I've started a list already (*mumblegrumble!@$Fskn*motherinlaw*).
When will this ignorant meme die?
Ignorant memes never die, they just .. well, I for one welcome our ignorant meme overlords.
I think I am going to take a drink at the firehose to drown my boredom.
I for one welcome our slow news humorless overlords.
Hold on cowboy! It has been many seconds since you last posted, please wait another many seconds before you can post again.
Has no word to express.. uhhmm... forgot what it's called now.
..until it's ion-propelled, RADAR navigated, coming complete with a charged particle beam and a death ray as standard safety features against enemy vehicles (eg: anyone who dares to race you at the traffic lights).
If I get it right, the EPA is allowed to be given authority to do things as long as they have no real effect? Of course the EPA is going to have a profound effect on every sector of the economy. If you curtail CO2 emissions you are basically affecting every step of production delivery and consumption of most goods. That is, after all, the gravity of the situation.
WTF is the EPA for anyway?
OTOH this is looking like an episode of Yes Minister, with the approach of overdoing a popular idea to make sure it sinks.
One of the reasons there's nobody there is because of all of the assholes on their Harleys :)
Taken literally or figuratively, the visuals are not appealing.
Something makes me want to go and re-read H.P. Lovecraft's At the Mountains of Madness
Your mother in law?
being completely ignorant of what management is doing and what is driving their decisions.
Actually I'm not ignorant of what drives their decisions (our management that is). They see their role as not to provide solutions (which would mean taking responsibility for them) but to outsource everything so they have minimal legal liability if something goes wrong. That's why they are walking around with cheque books, attending dinners and seminars and getting seduced by glossy brochures. They are customers, and they buy whatever gets sold to them.
Our IT department simply does not have the expertise to provide customized solutions for the organization, but as a matter of pride they fight like mad dogs when this is implied.
But the reality is (especially in IT), most managers HAVE DONE YOUR JOB
They haven't. I'm not an IT manager and I don't work in an IT department. Nonetheless I am aware of the goings on in their department.
and there's a good chance - especially with your attitude - that they're still better at it than you.
Again, I don't think their IT competency is at all up to scratch, and I think this situation is more widespread than you care to believe. Their incompetence in technical matters is compensated by political savvy, particularly in perpetuating the belief in the CEO that they are indispensable.
It is very easy, when one is in charge of making spending decisions, to take the lazy approach and just follow minimum standards such as 'take three bids and go for the cheapest' (and many won't even go that far). Usually nobody is checking whether you did proper research on the problem or the proposed solutions beforehand and it's not hard to make it look as though you did - just quote the papers that the sales rep gave you.
IT and other fields are the same in this respect. If you are incompetent or feel vulnerable, it's easier to go for Fisher-Price and blame Fisher-Price when the thing doesn't work. Saves having to work out what would have been better, having to employ people who know what they're doing, and then ending up being replaced by the guy you employed.
I know I'm not a professional manager, and I haven't been to management school, but some things are just plain obvious. The things that drive people are either the desire to be the best, to do one's best and to rise on merit, or to survive and do whatever it takes to prevent yourself from being usurped. The latter are easy prey for sales reps.
Actually I got some flak from other students because of that, but I wonder how many of those who gave me some got burnt out.
Well the advice I was given was by a dentist whose son had burn out from his software analyst job. He just didn't have any outside hobbies and had enough. Would have been better to have a life outside to start with. I don't know the research data on it (if there is any) but I am sure that computer science / engineering jobs have an over-representation of one or another personality trait, probably something which lends itself to people with narrow interests. Anyway thanks for your considered response.
After spending 8+ hours in a cubicle writing code, the last thing I'd want to do at the end of the day is come home and write more code.
Agreed. But OTOH I followed some advice long ago that went something like "whatever your passion in life is, don't let it be what you do for a living". It sounds counter-intuitive (and you may argue it is stupid), but the logic is that if you're passionate about programming, then it will find its way into anything you do. Better to get into some other profession first and have expertise in it. Pretty soon you'll find yourself making bits and pieces of code each day that fit in with your regular work, at the behest of your boss (or as a side business).
I'm not a master programmer by any means, but I've never stopped coding since I was twelve and now I'm making a good deal extra money at my job with my coding projects, but I can dictate how much I do. It's enough for it never to get boring.
I think the mistake is not clearly explaining to the masses that computers are complicated systems that require regular "check ups" that any user can perform themselves
Actually, computers shouldn't require any checkups that users should perform, apart from having the monitor wiped clean, maybe cleaning out the interior (in an enterprise environment this should be systematic but it almost never happens), and maintaining keyboards and mice.
Deciding to use a computer in the first place is meant to be a labour/money/time saving step, over all. People in workplaces do not assume responsibility for maintaining anything. Cars are fleet cars, to take your example, and they have scheduled maintenance that the employee, ideally, never notices.
I know that in reality, Windows PC's need local maintenance, good habits and so forth. This shouldn't be the case, and it isn't the case if you lock the computer down so much that it's hardly usable. Linux and Mac PC's are much easier to tighten up without impacting on usability. The problem with Windows PC's is people are used to doing too much on them and without doing what people do (installing free-fun-game-trojans) they get bored.
Vista is a problem because it's so greedy for hardware that the cost of deployment is ridiculous for practically no gain.
Did you intend for this to be a constructive comment?
Not really, but I mean, if you were a fly on the wall of most places, they aren't properly set up machines (they are minimally set up out-of-the-box setups) so I don't think it's 'simple' as such although everything is easy if you know how.