If only our local programmer had used his free time at work to mine for gold with which to pay the Chinese contractors. It would be an inverse of something, but I'm not sure what.
Remember it wasn't a hack. After 9/11, the federal community was told to "share data" and remove the old stovepipes and State did just that - they State shared their cable data with DOD. DOD's controls regarding access were the issue and enabled Manning to do what he did. The focus now is creating a more roles based access policy without inhibiting sharing. It's not as easy as one might think.
As a recruiter for IT (in the past) I was pleasantly surprised to find that the Coast Guard had an exceptionally rigorous and broad training schedule for their IT ratings. In fact, they were "perfect" candidates for jobs that needed broad experience and the ability to work independently.
I imagine the need to work afloat away from shore assistance had something to do with it.
From what I could tell CG pay was pretty crappy but if you're looking for on the job IT training that has meaning outside the sevice environment, I'd go with the CG - they really impressed me.
Once the encryption products mature for the iPads, and provide a secure environment for data at rest, they'll start penetrating the business market. Until then, they'll remain nice movie players.
There's an incoming generation (and here I'm thinking of kids just entering their teens) who may not buy into the same privacy fears you and I might share. "Why bother with privacy," they think. "Why do I need to be private?"
I'm not sure if the change in philosophy is a generational shift to accomodate a wholly different social culture, or if, darkly, it represents an entire generation mindswiped by consumer overlords.
Either way, it's troubling.
Once upon a time, SCO rented a car and the only improvement they made was to add a taxi meter. Because the SCO dispatcher was a zombie, and it was the only car in the fleet, the company died. The car is now driven aimlessly by the zombie dispatcher and the meter is still ticking. Nobody ever got into the cab but according to zombie law, somebody must pay.
The federal government hasn't done a particularly good job advertising their Scholarship for Service Federal Cyber Service program where promising cyber students are given scholarships in return for a promise to give the government 2 years of service as federal employees in a cyber security related position. Few in the IT field even know it exists. But it's an exceptional idea and most government agencies are lobbying for expanding it to bring in even more students.
The federal government isn't entirely incompetent or bereft of good ideas or lacking the will to implement them. The SFS Cyber Service program is one of their success stories.
You start out at the bottom because thats where we weed the tools out, it's cheaper that way, quite frankly, and it's the simple Darwinism of the marketplace. Show you give a shit with some enthusiasm and work your ass off and you'll get noticed. But in the marketplace, you're a tool until your prove you aren't. The trick is, it's neither pleasant nor easy to give a shit when you don't. So find something that you'll think you'll retain some enthusiasm about. That's not easy. Find a company that is enthusiastic about itself. You'll be able to see it in the very gaits of the people working there, top to bottom. You'll know it when you see it. It's work finding a place like that, and many of us look our entire lives for it. But if you're bitter that you're not getting what you are owed right out of college, choke on it because no one cares, you've already been weeded out.
In Jakarta you just pay an unemployed person standing on the sidewalk $1 to ride with you to work This should work swimmingly for the DC commuters starting in Baltimore.
DoD being really naive, thinking someone, out there, have the information to do 5x better than current tech and not having patented it..... and willing to sell it for a mere $1000000? Not naive. Hopeful that citizen inventors with their eye on a tough challange will surprise everyone. I think most on this board kinda like that sort of hope.
derail: when I was a kid I read a sci-fi story about a film the army took of an anti-grav device that was accidentally destroyed. They showed the film to a select group of scientists and challenged them to duplicate the device and they did. The film was an army hoax to motivate the scientists who believed that "if someone already did it, we can to." Great short story, forgot the author.
Since June of last year, it has been OMB (Office of Management and Budget) policy (OMB M-06-16) for all federal agencies to encrypt laptops if they carry sensitive data. Most federal agencies have extended the definition of sensitive data to any type of personal data. Smart federal agencies are simply requiring all/all mobile devices be fully encrypted. Department of Energy has smart people working for it, but smart guys often consider IT restrictions to be impediments to their work, which of course, is not smart at all.
No surprise here. The Navy has a history of being very ahead of the curve with their IT compared to many government counterparts, including cabinet level agencies. When other agencies were begging for connectivity with handhelds, the Navy had already had long rolled them out aboard their ships for connectity with the server operations of different onboard departments. Navy IT has been forward thinking for quite some time now. They'll consider FOSS very seriously and hopefully it'll have a ripple effect in other USG areas.
Re:This is what I HATE most about FOSS
on
GPLv2 Vs. GPLv3
·
· Score: 1, Insightful
The usual motive for tivoization is that the software has features the manufacturer thinks lots of people won't like.
RMS's idealism is admirable to be sure but I've grown so tired of his rhetorical devices that I just can't be bothered to pay attention to him anymore. His deliberate use of phraseology that implicity argues or accepts the point he is trying to explain is sophmoric and while I accept his motives I've grown tired of listening to his dreck.
Novell has agreed to pay Microsoft a percentage of revenue from open-source products
Although its not entirely unexpected that two corporations seek mutuality in the market, I never expected to see MS get money from open-source products. How MS continues to seek a piece of the FOSS market will be the developing story over the next years. How the FOSS community maintains its ideals in the face of similar commercial opportunities will certainly preoccupy the community.
A better, or at least more interesting strategy would have been if Shuttleworth had Dell miraculously agree to install Ubuntu anyway, despite if the box is preconfig'd with a paid Vista OS, and make it dual boot. Now THAT might provoke some interesting consumer responses. In fact, given MS's history of monopolistic inclinations, the requirement for a dual boot box, with an additional free OS (besides Windows) as a non-crapware extra, might be viewed by many as an appropriate answer of atonement by our favorite corporate overlords.
I've been working overseas in the Middle East and Asia and my IT workforce have been pretty much evenly divided by gender. Perhaps non-western women view IT as an unusual opportunity to gain entre to the marketplace and work with men as peers. Why it's not appealing to western women is not clear in the article although I must say not much of anything is clear in the article.
Don't forget that a computer is a big ticket item for many families. One of their most important considerations when they buy is "what programs are out there for the kids?" Compared with the wealth of solid education and kid entertainment software for Windows, Linux is a dry desert. It may not be your calculus when you chose your OS, but it is for many families. Port Freddie Fish (as one example) over to Linux and you might have a deal.
Companies may be starting to see that there may be a business model that supports both FOSS and proprietary software. FOSS may be great for backend infrastructure, and proprietary may be great for applications that depend on the infrastructure. There's obviously room for both right now and it may drive the market in unexpected and creative ways. That's good for everybody. The two concepts are not necessarily exclusive in a business climate that supports both. It's obvious that both FOSS and proprietary products influence each other's direction and it'll be interesting to see how the two ideas eventually converge.
Halprin is an author whose works are powerfully beautiful and and he uses wonderful language that continues to resonate with most readers well long after they finish his novels. I don't particularly agree with him, but if we're going to dismiss his argument we could at least attempt to do it as eloquently as the author's argument that we want to counter.
Few MS products look good out of the gate. Then they do what we do: they listen to their users and improve their product incrementally. Same thing FOSS devs do - but we don't like to admit that because MS are evil and their products don't live up to our standards. However, they make a shit pile doing it. A company with 20 something billion in reserves and no debt is not going to go down anytime soon folks and its foolish to underestimate a juggernaut with their resources. I'm not a fanboi and I could care less how well they are doing and its silly on our part to fixate on how poorly we would like to believe they are doing. It makes us look foolish. Let's fixate on improving our own dogfood instead of listening to our own make believe FUD. Let's not stoop to their level.
Slashdot Mirror
If only our local programmer had used his free time at work to mine for gold with which to pay the Chinese contractors. It would be an inverse of something, but I'm not sure what.
Remember it wasn't a hack. After 9/11, the federal community was told to "share data" and remove the old stovepipes and State did just that - they State shared their cable data with DOD. DOD's controls regarding access were the issue and enabled Manning to do what he did. The focus now is creating a more roles based access policy without inhibiting sharing. It's not as easy as one might think.
As a recruiter for IT (in the past) I was pleasantly surprised to find that the Coast Guard had an exceptionally rigorous and broad training schedule for their IT ratings. In fact, they were "perfect" candidates for jobs that needed broad experience and the ability to work independently. I imagine the need to work afloat away from shore assistance had something to do with it. From what I could tell CG pay was pretty crappy but if you're looking for on the job IT training that has meaning outside the sevice environment, I'd go with the CG - they really impressed me.
Why do you ask? Did you ask to pay with your BitCoins?
When my trademark of "Taliban" and "Al Queda" is final, I think our action figures might have to see each other in court.
Once the encryption products mature for the iPads, and provide a secure environment for data at rest, they'll start penetrating the business market. Until then, they'll remain nice movie players.
There's an incoming generation (and here I'm thinking of kids just entering their teens) who may not buy into the same privacy fears you and I might share. "Why bother with privacy," they think. "Why do I need to be private?" I'm not sure if the change in philosophy is a generational shift to accomodate a wholly different social culture, or if, darkly, it represents an entire generation mindswiped by consumer overlords. Either way, it's troubling.
Once upon a time, SCO rented a car and the only improvement they made was to add a taxi meter. Because the SCO dispatcher was a zombie, and it was the only car in the fleet, the company died. The car is now driven aimlessly by the zombie dispatcher and the meter is still ticking. Nobody ever got into the cab but according to zombie law, somebody must pay.
The federal government hasn't done a particularly good job advertising their Scholarship for Service Federal Cyber Service program where promising cyber students are given scholarships in return for a promise to give the government 2 years of service as federal employees in a cyber security related position. Few in the IT field even know it exists. But it's an exceptional idea and most government agencies are lobbying for expanding it to bring in even more students. The federal government isn't entirely incompetent or bereft of good ideas or lacking the will to implement them. The SFS Cyber Service program is one of their success stories.
So instead of letting the air out of the car's tires, a car he loved, he simply wouldn't give the keys to dangerous drivers.
You start out at the bottom because thats where we weed the tools out, it's cheaper that way, quite frankly, and it's the simple Darwinism of the marketplace. Show you give a shit with some enthusiasm and work your ass off and you'll get noticed. But in the marketplace, you're a tool until your prove you aren't. The trick is, it's neither pleasant nor easy to give a shit when you don't. So find something that you'll think you'll retain some enthusiasm about. That's not easy. Find a company that is enthusiastic about itself. You'll be able to see it in the very gaits of the people working there, top to bottom. You'll know it when you see it. It's work finding a place like that, and many of us look our entire lives for it. But if you're bitter that you're not getting what you are owed right out of college, choke on it because no one cares, you've already been weeded out.
When Richard told me I was keeping the free people down with my Tivo, he lost me forever.
Something tells me that patenting life forms is going to make the code world's problems look rational in comparison.
Since June of last year, it has been OMB (Office of Management and Budget) policy (OMB M-06-16) for all federal agencies to encrypt laptops if they carry sensitive data. Most federal agencies have extended the definition of sensitive data to any type of personal data. Smart federal agencies are simply requiring all/all mobile devices be fully encrypted. Department of Energy has smart people working for it, but smart guys often consider IT restrictions to be impediments to their work, which of course, is not smart at all.
No surprise here. The Navy has a history of being very ahead of the curve with their IT compared to many government counterparts, including cabinet level agencies. When other agencies were begging for connectivity with handhelds, the Navy had already had long rolled them out aboard their ships for connectity with the server operations of different onboard departments. Navy IT has been forward thinking for quite some time now. They'll consider FOSS very seriously and hopefully it'll have a ripple effect in other USG areas.
RMS's idealism is admirable to be sure but I've grown so tired of his rhetorical devices that I just can't be bothered to pay attention to him anymore. His deliberate use of phraseology that implicity argues or accepts the point he is trying to explain is sophmoric and while I accept his motives I've grown tired of listening to his dreck.
Novell has agreed to pay Microsoft a percentage of revenue from open-source products Although its not entirely unexpected that two corporations seek mutuality in the market, I never expected to see MS get money from open-source products. How MS continues to seek a piece of the FOSS market will be the developing story over the next years. How the FOSS community maintains its ideals in the face of similar commercial opportunities will certainly preoccupy the community.
A better, or at least more interesting strategy would have been if Shuttleworth had Dell miraculously agree to install Ubuntu anyway, despite if the box is preconfig'd with a paid Vista OS, and make it dual boot. Now THAT might provoke some interesting consumer responses. In fact, given MS's history of monopolistic inclinations, the requirement for a dual boot box, with an additional free OS (besides Windows) as a non-crapware extra, might be viewed by many as an appropriate answer of atonement by our favorite corporate overlords.
I've been working overseas in the Middle East and Asia and my IT workforce have been pretty much evenly divided by gender. Perhaps non-western women view IT as an unusual opportunity to gain entre to the marketplace and work with men as peers. Why it's not appealing to western women is not clear in the article although I must say not much of anything is clear in the article.
Don't forget that a computer is a big ticket item for many families. One of their most important considerations when they buy is "what programs are out there for the kids?" Compared with the wealth of solid education and kid entertainment software for Windows, Linux is a dry desert. It may not be your calculus when you chose your OS, but it is for many families. Port Freddie Fish (as one example) over to Linux and you might have a deal.
Companies may be starting to see that there may be a business model that supports both FOSS and proprietary software. FOSS may be great for backend infrastructure, and proprietary may be great for applications that depend on the infrastructure. There's obviously room for both right now and it may drive the market in unexpected and creative ways. That's good for everybody. The two concepts are not necessarily exclusive in a business climate that supports both. It's obvious that both FOSS and proprietary products influence each other's direction and it'll be interesting to see how the two ideas eventually converge.
Halprin is an author whose works are powerfully beautiful and and he uses wonderful language that continues to resonate with most readers well long after they finish his novels. I don't particularly agree with him, but if we're going to dismiss his argument we could at least attempt to do it as eloquently as the author's argument that we want to counter.
Few MS products look good out of the gate. Then they do what we do: they listen to their users and improve their product incrementally. Same thing FOSS devs do - but we don't like to admit that because MS are evil and their products don't live up to our standards. However, they make a shit pile doing it. A company with 20 something billion in reserves and no debt is not going to go down anytime soon folks and its foolish to underestimate a juggernaut with their resources. I'm not a fanboi and I could care less how well they are doing and its silly on our part to fixate on how poorly we would like to believe they are doing. It makes us look foolish. Let's fixate on improving our own dogfood instead of listening to our own make believe FUD. Let's not stoop to their level.