Hi
You don't specify which government, but let's assume it's one with an comprehensive information assurance policy.
First things first. Find out who the technical authority for information assurance is in your country.
Then find out what the official policy on erasing and destroying information assets are. This information may not be published, and you may need to be registered with the technical authority to access it.
Then cross reference against the terms of the contract.
Then do.
To help you a little, most best practice policies describe a range of methods. The selection of which method depends on
* the device used to hold the data - HDD, flash memory (multiple technologies), DRAM, etc
* the classification / protective marking of the data (SECRET, TOP SECRET etc)
* whether the device is being re-used (for new data) within the same secure facility where it was held originally, or is it being removed from that facility (for destruction)
Removal methods vary from using certified data erasure products, to complete physical destruction via a specified and approved method. In any case, there will be a detailed procedure to follow, possibly also independent witnessing and certification of the destruction.
In any case, there will be an explicit process to follow, as well as copious paperwork.
Note the use of the phrase 'certified...products'. While tools such as DBAN may be effective, they are not approved and certified by your national technical authority for information assurance. Using a non-certified product is equivalent to using nothing, and there may be penalties if you claim to have followed the set process, but used such non approved tools.
Your organisation should have an information security officer (or similar executive) who is responsible for this. Normally it is a pre-requisite to have such a professional as a pre-requisite to handling classified / protectively marked material in most countries.
What you've discovered should really have been caught pre-contract signing, by your legal and/or commercial people. You need to talk to your bosses about this. Oversights such as this can destroy a business, both in terms of money and reputation.
HTH
g
I think you are confusing some of the political unrest from the 80s with the self-serving mindless violence of recent weeks.
It is absolutely true to say that government cuts are affecting national and local funding for all citizens, and they are affecting deprived areas. However, these cuts have only come in to effect fully from April this year. The unemployment and illiteracy have been at those levels for a long time, including during the boom years of 1995-2005, and during the previous Labour administration. It is illogical to say that the currently limited impacts of the austerity measures are giving people cause to riot. If you look at the actual activity during the riots, it didn't include political protest, marches, speeches or any other normal signs of protest by ordinary people. It did include a relatively large number of groups causing criminal damage, violence and commiting flagrant acts of theft - typically of high value goods and big name brands. This was theft on a large scale, enabled by breakdown in normal social barriers.
The government is planning to reduce both front and back office police numbers, however these cuts have not taken place yet to any extent. Police numbers are at almost record levels. The police didn't retreat to protect stations, they deployed in the areas that they thought needed protection. However the mobile hoards, enabled by SMS and social networks, just moved to new sites, typically after a short skirmish. In short, asymmetric confrontation and overwhelming numbers. Once the scale of the problem was understood (a d a few politicians returned from holiday) they brought in an extra 16000 police for London alone - an increase of approximately 25% on the normal force. This managed to suppress most of the activity.
There are currently reportedly over 1000 people arrested, and the MPS have suggested that possibly another 2000 will be, once the CCTV and other evidence is analysed. This is hardly tiny by any one's measure.
As for brutal policing, the MPS have been negatively criticised for not being tough enough in the first few days, and they adjusted their tactics subsequently. They have not however used plastic bullets, water cannon, tear gas or any other large scale crowd suppression measures. This is not brutal. If you want to see 'firm' policing, ask the French.
As for fixing problems on the ground, the previous administration spent 10s of billions over more than a decade on enhanced social benefits and programmes for the disadvantaged. While it has doubtless helped many, it has also raised a generation that expects to live off the state, spurn education and employment, contribute nothing in return except vocal occasionally violent protest about how they are not provided enough.
Not only is it a big ass PNG, it's also in AdobeRGB colourspace - so probably about.1% of the readership is actually able to see it correctly.
and never mind cutting file size by 75%, try 90 or 95%, and that's without even touching the resolution. The only question is why he didn't go the whole hog with a 32-bit image instead of the paltry 8-bit option. (that last bit was sarcasm, or should I say the last 24 bots were sarcasm)
Leading technology web site, eh?
Remind me again of the relevance of slashdot, with stories regularly appearing a day or two days behind other sites, slashvertisements, and little in the way of original content.
And I agree with the others, taking advantage of users' good will and giving nothing back is pretty weak.
I really hope you're trying to be sarcastic or ironic - otherwise there isn't a clue stick big enough.
The 'only way' isn't. There are several. All methods of interception require money, some require legislation and the rest require subterfuge and technical skill.
In this case I imagine it's very simple. The state has a law saying it's legal for certain agencies to intercept calls in order to protect national security. The state's telecoms provider(s) purchase interception equipment from telecoms hardware providers. It gets plugged in and switched on. The state uses it. No conspiracy, no mad l33t skillz, no drama. Except possibly for the subjects/victims of the interception.
For examples of legal intercept equipment, see http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=7&ved=0CEkQFjAG&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cisco.com%2Fweb%2Fabout%2Fsecurity%2Fintelligence%2FLI-3GPP.html&ei=CWy3Td-NNZS1hAe6_8H3Dg&usg=AFQjCNGEKGTT3PTOMkB172TvxVlkqgMKZg or
http://www.scribd.com/doc/49742557/50/Legal-Interception-Gateway-LIG
There is of course the relatively recent case of illegal intercept, in Greece. There it came to light that politicians and other high profile figures had their mobils calls tapped. On investigation, one of the country's mobile providers found that someone had installed, configured and turned on the 'legal intercept' software/hardware to do the tapping. Here's the rub - it wasn't done by the government company or home intelligence service. So who did it and why?
Truecrypt is not a product tested and approved by http://www.cesg.gov.uk/ so it can't be used for UK government business. If someone is willing to pony up the accreditation fees, and it passes, then it can be used.
These new UK gov regulations are interesting - they make specific nominated individuals in every government organisation personally responsible for data security - with penalties including fines and prison. Unsurprisingly, data security is now very heavily implemented and monitored.
All UK government devices storing information classified as RESTRICTED ( no US equivalent) must have two factor authentication, and full disk encryption using a FIPS140 certified product from a CESG-approved list. Anything carrying CONFIDENTIAL or SECRET has the same, plus additional techniques and handling protocols to ensure CIA (confidentiality, integrity, assurance). TOP SECRET isn't discussed in open forums.
This is a non story if they are accidental losses. All organisations, including those within and around the intelligence communities, lose assets. The real questions should be (1) was it accidental, (2) if not, who made the effort and (3) are you confident the systems in place will protect the information for long enough until its value decreases below the effort required to recover it.
To be honest, the more pressing issue for ordinary citizens is not governments protecting or losing information about citizens, but private organisations.
This would be the UK that led the development of modern computing with the work of Alan Turing, led the development of the use of computers in industrial and military environments (Bletchley Park) and which dramatically shortened the second world war. This would be the UK that invented public key cryptography before the NSA. This would be the UK which developed working, scalable MIMD parallel processing (transputer) in the early 90s. Then there was the matter of Boole, who did some minor mathematical work. That UK.
Dude, leave the laptop. you have two weeks in a new country / continent, why sit down with a laptop? If you want to email or blog, there are many internet kiosk/ cafe type places.
Seriously, leave it.
Two weeks is too long in London. Give yourself a day to get over jetlag, and 1-2 days to cover the major attractions. Then take the next ten days to travel around, and come back to london to a final sweep of interesting places, and get ready for the flight.
You can grab a train to Paris (France), and spend a day or two there - get another country in. Get a flight to Dublin, Cork or Belfast (45 mins) Yet another country.
The first step is to find out what the business wants, and how much it is willing to pay. THEN you go out to find out what tech is appropriate/affordable to do it.
Ask the heads of each office, and the main business managers what they want the tech to do now, in a year and in three years. Do you have a business continuity plan that has to be allowed for. If you don't have a BC plan, now's a good time to have one done, before you buy a load of kit that may not do the job.
Once you have a list of business needs, and put them in a prioritised list (again the managers set the priority), you go out and look at what can do the job. Assuming you find a reasonable solution within budget, you need to plan the migration.
Protip: do not attempt to migrate everything in one go. Do it in steps, with breaks in between.
Proprotip: whatever your migration, be able to revert to the original solution in less than 8 hours - ie one working day.
Migration is the biggest gotcha - plan, plan and plan again. Do a dry run. Start with the least critical services. You do have backups, right? Fully tested backups, from ground zero? You do have all your network and infrastructure accurately and completely mapped out, and all configuration settings / files stored on paper and independent machines?
Both arguments for VM and KISS have their place - only you can decide. But when you do decide, make sure it's based on evidence, and will end up making the business better.
Don't forget Total Cost of Ownership - the shiny boxes may run faster, but will you have to hire two more techs to keep them running, or a new maintenance contract?
Don't forget training - for you, your staff and the end users. If you're putting shiney newness in place, people will need to know how to use it, and do their jobs at least as quickly as on the old solution. No use putting in shiny web4.0 uber cloud goodness, if the users end up spending an hour doing a job that used to take 5 minutes, because they don't know how to use it properly, or the interface doesn't easily work with their business processes.
"Executives" are interested in money - what earns money for the company, what costs money for the company, what can increase future money for the company, what prevents increasing future money for the company.
Think about the main things you are doing, or plan to do over the next week, month, quarter, year. Which of the four results (earn, cost, increase, decrease) do those things do? Can you mitigate (reduce) the negatives? Can you improve the positives? What are the costs (time, money, resources)? What are the impacts/benefits (save or increase time, money, resources)?
Here's a couple of examples: "Our mail system is aging and is struggling with the current load. I estimate it causes up to two hours delay per employee per month. I plan to increase the memory and disk space. It will cost $x hundred, and take 3 days to implement. The benefit will be the increase in productivity and delay the need to buy an entire new server for two more years."
"Our finance dept is struggling to keep up with the number of invoices that need to be processed. With the CFO I am evaluating three new systems which can help automate the process. The cost of the system is $x in capital expenditure, and then $y in annual licence fees. The CFO estimates that it will reduce the time to invoice clients from 10 days to four days, and increase cash flow for the company."
So, think in terms of money. Think what business problems or opportunities that IT makes better (or worse). State the problem or opportunity, what you are doing / want to do, say what the impact of your proposal is / will be.
Stick to this basic formula, and you'll soon be seen as someone who brings answers and adds value, instead of the stereotypical geek who complains, costs money and does little of value.
First of all, establish exactly what it is they are asking you for. 'Strategy' has to be one of the most abused words in the modern world. Is it really strategy - ie setting goals without defining how they are acheived? Is it policy - ie setting the framework of rules to work within while achieving the strategy? Or is it tactical advice - the nuts and bolts of how you actually implement the strategy and policy?
Assuming it is strategy, then...
Second, define what you want IT to achieve - in terms of benefits and abilities, and what you want IT not to do - in terms of drawbacks and liabilities.
Third - prioritise the importance of each of the individual results from point two above.
Now you have a list of things you want IT to do, and you understand how to allocate funds and time, based on their priority. The next steps are to decide the policy to run them, and tactical implementation.
You'll get a lot of folks here saying things like "allow FOSS...deny " These aren't direct strategies. A strategy would be to allow solutions to be developed/deployed based on fitness for purpose. The conseqent policy would be to allow multiple OS / applications to be deployed within a controlled framework. The following tactic would be to assess what the user needs and can afford, identify what potential market solutions are out there and how much they cost (capex and opex) and pick the best.
As they're offering you a range of experiences, it would be beneficial to learn functional programming, procedural programming, parallel programming. Oh and lisp. If you get a good understanding of the similarities and differences of func vs procedural, and teh thought processes on how to solve problems with them, you'll do just fine. Parallel programming (SIMD / MIMD) is only going to become more and more important as the number of cores in common use rises.
The actual implementation of each functional / procedural language is largely irrelevant - it's learning how to think and solve problems in their respective paradigms.
LISP is a great teacher - derided for the brackets, it is incredibly powerful and based on extremely fundamental maths. Using a handful of operators, you can do the most amazing things.
Even their own marketing calls it "fine tuning". Apple senior execs called it a refinement of Leopard, or words to that effect. It's a service pack.
... took out the express slot because not enough of their customers wanted it. I...never saw the use for it
It's a pro slot, used by pros, to connect pro kit - usually high end audio, video and storage. Remind me of the branding of this product again... oh yeah, pro!
How often does a MacBook Pro user replace their battery?
In my case, after just over a year - and that following recommended charge/discharge practices. Apple kindly sent me a replacement, as the first was an explosion risk. It died a little over a year later. My experience is not unusual for a Powerbook battery. The lack of easy access to replace the cell cheaply with a non-oem part is a strong disincentive.
Apple is pricing their notebooks more aggressive *and* improving the hardware
Apple is reducing the price of entry. It's arguable they are NOT improving the hardware (beyond normal Moore's Law) for the same price at the mid and high end prices. Cf express card loss, FW400 loss, discrete gfx loss. And even in their Pro line, they charging $30 for a lead to let you connect to any external display - not even a free HDMI slot. Last but not least, still offering only 2 USB slots, on the 15" models is a joke - especially as there's no express slot now. Use an external mouse, and now you can't plug in your external drive, as there's no spare slot for power. Use a mouse and a external card reader, and you're SOL to do anything else.
I wanted to buy a MBP from this upgrade cycle. I won't - instead staying with a Powerbook G4 that's alot slower, but offers so much more in terms of usability. My hope is that APPL will correct some of these decisions in the next cycle. It's unlikely we'll go back to discrete batteries any time soon, but hopefully get what many users want - connectivity options.
How much did they cost? When did you buy them? How much are they worth now. How much can you earn from using them? how much do they cost to run?
Add up all the costs, over 12 months, 24 months, 36 months. Add up all the potential revenue they'll earn.
If the first is bigger than the second, you're losing money - sell them now for as much as you can, cut your losses. If the revenue is bigger, you might consider using Net Present Value (look up the NPV function in your favorite spreadsheet) to determine if it's really a profit. If the NPV is negative or zero, sell. Only if the NPV is postive , and by more than a fistfull of dollars, AND you're confident about the numbers should you hang on to them.
Or can you donate them to a charity, and write them off for tax?
Rant: given that performance / price ratio is constantly improving, why would anyone ever ever ever buy hardware a second before they absolutely have a proven need for it to earn a buck? That's like buying fuel, and letting it evaporate in the desert sun.
why? because I dare negativelly criticise the whining, immature comments of a single soldier?
Did I negativelly criticise all members of the armed forces? No. Did I negativelly criticise the policy or practice which put him there? No.
I pointed out that the expectations and response of some serving personnel are radically different from the past. That's not to take away from the dirty difficult job that many serving folks do at the sharp end. Spot the difference.
Pick apart my argument - fine. Pick an ad hominem attack, and you're the loser.
And before anyone gets all high and mighty, remember that the vast majority of americans don't know where Afghanistan is, or why you're deployed there. If asked, most would say "Terr'ists". Not human rights, not preventing a narco state, not establishing democracy. Also, most Americans didn't complain when GWB diverted resources from the Afghan border - who were chasing a real terrorist called OB Laden. They didn't complain when vast numbers of troops where moved from Afghanistan, creating a power vacuum, thrown into a pointless war (politically, economically, militarily)his own father declined more than a decade earlier. That power vacuum enabled the Taliban to return, and insurgents from all over the globe to gather, so that Afghanistan now has a terrorist problem, that didn't exist before.
in the first world war, soldiers wrote home about the terrible carnage, the awful conditions, and how they wanted to go home. They wrote poetry and listened to jazz.
in the second world war, soldiers wrote home about the incredible pace of war, the awful conditions, fighting the tyrannical fascism of Germany, Italy and Japan, and how they wanted to go home. they wrote novels, and listened to dance music.
in the vietnam war, soldiers wrote home about the pointlessness of war, the awful conditions, the alienation being in a completely foreign culture where both sides saw you as an invader, and how they wanted to go home. they smoked dope and listened to The Doors.
You're posting on a web site, complaining your recreational toy hasn't turned up after a few weeks.
May i humbly suggest that your time is better spent reading some books, to enlighten you as to why you're in the position you are, and just how the hell you and your countrymen arrived there.
i'd suggest Steve Coll's "Ghost Wars: The Secret History of the CIA, Afghanistan and Bin Laden" - well written, and a modern perspective on the afghan condition. And for the longer historical perspective "Afghanistan: A Military History From Alexander The Great To The Fall Of The Taliban" by Stephen Tanner. There are many other excellent books out there.
I'd also question your choice of laptop. For challenging conditions, with heat, sand, and a lot of bumps, I'd suggest a panasonic toughbook or other ruggedised solution. Unless of course, you're a REM who's several hundred clicks from any forward operating post, and have ready access to 24x7 electricity with no spikes, aircon and constant net access. Apologies if I've called that one wrong, but you're not exactly giving the impression of being at the sharp end of business out there.
The detail you provide in your question is telling. You discuss mostly the technical aspects (laptop spec, ports, etc.). You barely describe the rationale, or address how it will be perceived, only claiming that other in the company don't understand. You fail to set out the business benefit, or how you will pitch it to your seniors. You fail to set out the personal benefit - apart from the fact you've given everyone a shiny console.
So it's not clear why anyone would want it, or why anyone would approve it. it is clear that by failing to communicate to the rest of the company, people will arrive at their own conclusions, and they are likely to be ones that do not reflect well on you. This is not shaping up to be a McKinsey case study in how to execute an innovative reward scheme that will meet universal acclaim and cure cancer.
Have you had a bunch of your team actually ask for this? I thought not.
Go back to the basics. What are you trying to achieve? What are the potential solutions of meeting your goals. How much will it cost the company? What are the benefits for your team? What are the benefits for your company? What are the drawbacks for the team / company?
And anyone who says "google does it!" doesn't understand that (a) google hires a very very particular type of personality and (b) google has a very particular corporate culture which is geared to using alternative reward schemes. If you want those things, go work for google, or another company with similar values.
No-one can deny that with growing popularity of OS X that it becomes an increasingly attractive target. Malware writing works on similar economics to regular software: this implies that malware will exist but be a niche deployment. So it is a concern, but not the end of the world, or of Apple, as the world likes to regularly predict.
The article was mixed in accuracy. Many Mac users believe themselves to be invulnerable - the truth is they are currently/less/ vulnerable than the mainstream desktop OS. The thesis that using an intel processor increases security risks is not true - OSen don't allow direct hardware access as such, and how many script kiddies write x86 microcode?. Running Windows on a IntelMac may potentially increase security probems, and reduce the Macintosh (not OS X) brand reputation for security. It depends on how the 'wall' between x86 file access and OSX file access is implemented.
Nothing in IT or anywhere else is 100%. Currently OS X is more secure in many areas than its competitors. To maintain or improve on this, constant vigilence and innovation are required by Apple, ISVs and most importantly users.
You're a techie, but this is no reason to start off with a solely tech discussion. As a former techie, and more recently a consultant, here's my spin:
(1) get your boss to write down the business reasons for the change. Not technical reasons, business - cost savings, productivity increases, etc. If there aren't well defined reasons, then you can't technically come up with a solution that's much use, as they haven't defined the problem for you.
(2) Get your boss to write down the goal of the project. This is usually a single statement. Eg if you worked in an oil company the goal might be "deploy a pipeline from turkey to russia that can carry 5m L oil per day". If he won't write it down, you write it, and get him to approve it formally.
If he can't or won't, then you don't have a baseline to judge all future decisions against. I.e. whwnever you have a question or problem, ask yourself does it help or hinder this goal.
(3) Figure out what the parameters of the deployment should be: think what, when, why, how, where. E.g. it should be completed within X months, should not cost more than $Y, should be availble in Z% of offices, should not take more time to complete a transaction than the exisiting system. These parameters help define what you should and shouldn't do, how much resource to devote etc. Basically they give you the rules of the game.
(4) Figure out who the stakeholders are - ie who is affected, and who has power within the company. This typically includes the fincial director at a high level, and end-suers at the low level. Speak to the FD - he often has final say over everything, and has his own set of expectations different to the IT director. Speak to the users - they can suggest problems that need to be fixed, and things that work and they want kept. Knowing the stakeholders and keeping them informed and happy is the biggest challenge.
No offense, but you say you're a 7m technician intern. This makes me suspicious they putting a core business function in your hands that if fucked up could kill the company.
I suggest after doing basic research, going back to the IT director and saying something along the lines of "the total cost of switching, impacts on the business and risk to business interruption are not clear. Yes the current solution might look expensive on paper, but it might be less expensive than swapping. We need to scope this in a bit more depth, and possibly engage outside experts for a small study to understand costs, benefits and impacts." then hand him a short list of potential expert companies that can help. by this stage you'll have called these companies, and in general terms described your problem, and checked out if than can help, how and will it cost. You'll have names, phone numbers and email addresses for all of them.
I agree with the others when they say EDI isn't something to take on alone. Use the experts. If you've never project managed before on any scale, I suggest you get help with that too - internally or externally.
Best of luck. this can be a great learning experience.
Ps if your company throws a wobbly at any of the things I've suggested above, tehn that means they're not serious. Find yourself another job, they don't pay you enough to deal with bad management on top of everything.
Sherlock was a reduced version of the V-Twin search technology Apple Research spent many years working on. This was at least a decade ahead of Microsoft.
Unfortunately Apple Research and V-Twin were canned in a reshuffle and cost-cutting exercise.
Slashdot Mirror
Hi You don't specify which government, but let's assume it's one with an comprehensive information assurance policy. First things first. Find out who the technical authority for information assurance is in your country. Then find out what the official policy on erasing and destroying information assets are. This information may not be published, and you may need to be registered with the technical authority to access it. Then cross reference against the terms of the contract. Then do. To help you a little, most best practice policies describe a range of methods. The selection of which method depends on * the device used to hold the data - HDD, flash memory (multiple technologies), DRAM, etc * the classification / protective marking of the data (SECRET, TOP SECRET etc) * whether the device is being re-used (for new data) within the same secure facility where it was held originally, or is it being removed from that facility (for destruction) Removal methods vary from using certified data erasure products, to complete physical destruction via a specified and approved method. In any case, there will be a detailed procedure to follow, possibly also independent witnessing and certification of the destruction. In any case, there will be an explicit process to follow, as well as copious paperwork. Note the use of the phrase 'certified...products'. While tools such as DBAN may be effective, they are not approved and certified by your national technical authority for information assurance. Using a non-certified product is equivalent to using nothing, and there may be penalties if you claim to have followed the set process, but used such non approved tools. Your organisation should have an information security officer (or similar executive) who is responsible for this. Normally it is a pre-requisite to have such a professional as a pre-requisite to handling classified / protectively marked material in most countries. What you've discovered should really have been caught pre-contract signing, by your legal and/or commercial people. You need to talk to your bosses about this. Oversights such as this can destroy a business, both in terms of money and reputation. HTH g
I think you are confusing some of the political unrest from the 80s with the self-serving mindless violence of recent weeks.
It is absolutely true to say that government cuts are affecting national and local funding for all citizens, and they are affecting deprived areas. However, these cuts have only come in to effect fully from April this year. The unemployment and illiteracy have been at those levels for a long time, including during the boom years of 1995-2005, and during the previous Labour administration. It is illogical to say that the currently limited impacts of the austerity measures are giving people cause to riot. If you look at the actual activity during the riots, it didn't include political protest, marches, speeches or any other normal signs of protest by ordinary people. It did include a relatively large number of groups causing criminal damage, violence and commiting flagrant acts of theft - typically of high value goods and big name brands. This was theft on a large scale, enabled by breakdown in normal social barriers.
The government is planning to reduce both front and back office police numbers, however these cuts have not taken place yet to any extent. Police numbers are at almost record levels. The police didn't retreat to protect stations, they deployed in the areas that they thought needed protection. However the mobile hoards, enabled by SMS and social networks, just moved to new sites, typically after a short skirmish. In short, asymmetric confrontation and overwhelming numbers. Once the scale of the problem was understood (a d a few politicians returned from holiday) they brought in an extra 16000 police for London alone - an increase of approximately 25% on the normal force. This managed to suppress most of the activity.
There are currently reportedly over 1000 people arrested, and the MPS have suggested that possibly another 2000 will be, once the CCTV and other evidence is analysed. This is hardly tiny by any one's measure.
As for brutal policing, the MPS have been negatively criticised for not being tough enough in the first few days, and they adjusted their tactics subsequently. They have not however used plastic bullets, water cannon, tear gas or any other large scale crowd suppression measures. This is not brutal. If you want to see 'firm' policing, ask the French.
As for fixing problems on the ground, the previous administration spent 10s of billions over more than a decade on enhanced social benefits and programmes for the disadvantaged. While it has doubtless helped many, it has also raised a generation that expects to live off the state, spurn education and employment, contribute nothing in return except vocal occasionally violent protest about how they are not provided enough.
Not only is it a big ass PNG, it's also in AdobeRGB colourspace - so probably about .1% of the readership is actually able to see it correctly.
and never mind cutting file size by 75%, try 90 or 95%, and that's without even touching the resolution. The only question is why he didn't go the whole hog with a 32-bit image instead of the paltry 8-bit option. (that last bit was sarcasm, or should I say the last 24 bots were sarcasm)
Leading technology web site, eh?
Remind me again of the relevance of slashdot, with stories regularly appearing a day or two days behind other sites, slashvertisements, and little in the way of original content.
And I agree with the others, taking advantage of users' good will and giving nothing back is pretty weak.
I really hope you're trying to be sarcastic or ironic - otherwise there isn't a clue stick big enough. The 'only way' isn't. There are several. All methods of interception require money, some require legislation and the rest require subterfuge and technical skill. In this case I imagine it's very simple. The state has a law saying it's legal for certain agencies to intercept calls in order to protect national security. The state's telecoms provider(s) purchase interception equipment from telecoms hardware providers. It gets plugged in and switched on. The state uses it. No conspiracy, no mad l33t skillz, no drama. Except possibly for the subjects/victims of the interception. For examples of legal intercept equipment, see http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=7&ved=0CEkQFjAG&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cisco.com%2Fweb%2Fabout%2Fsecurity%2Fintelligence%2FLI-3GPP.html&ei=CWy3Td-NNZS1hAe6_8H3Dg&usg=AFQjCNGEKGTT3PTOMkB172TvxVlkqgMKZg or http://www.scribd.com/doc/49742557/50/Legal-Interception-Gateway-LIG There is of course the relatively recent case of illegal intercept, in Greece. There it came to light that politicians and other high profile figures had their mobils calls tapped. On investigation, one of the country's mobile providers found that someone had installed, configured and turned on the 'legal intercept' software/hardware to do the tapping. Here's the rub - it wasn't done by the government company or home intelligence service. So who did it and why?
They have - by mandating that appropriate controls are implemented, including full disk encryption. See http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/spf/sp4_isa.aspx - specifically requirement #40.
Truecrypt is not a product tested and approved by http://www.cesg.gov.uk/ so it can't be used for UK government business. If someone is willing to pony up the accreditation fees, and it passes, then it can be used.
These new UK gov regulations are interesting - they make specific nominated individuals in every government organisation personally responsible for data security - with penalties including fines and prison. Unsurprisingly, data security is now very heavily implemented and monitored.
All UK government devices storing information classified as RESTRICTED ( no US equivalent) must have two factor authentication, and full disk encryption using a FIPS140 certified product from a CESG-approved list. Anything carrying CONFIDENTIAL or SECRET has the same, plus additional techniques and handling protocols to ensure CIA (confidentiality, integrity, assurance). TOP SECRET isn't discussed in open forums.
This is a non story if they are accidental losses. All organisations, including those within and around the intelligence communities, lose assets. The real questions should be (1) was it accidental, (2) if not, who made the effort and (3) are you confident the systems in place will protect the information for long enough until its value decreases below the effort required to recover it.
To be honest, the more pressing issue for ordinary citizens is not governments protecting or losing information about citizens, but private organisations.
This would be the UK that led the development of modern computing with the work of Alan Turing, led the development of the use of computers in industrial and military environments (Bletchley Park) and which dramatically shortened the second world war. This would be the UK that invented public key cryptography before the NSA. This would be the UK which developed working, scalable MIMD parallel processing (transputer) in the early 90s. Then there was the matter of Boole, who did some minor mathematical work. That UK.
Dude,
leave the laptop. you have two weeks in a new country / continent, why sit down with a laptop? If you want to email or blog, there are many internet kiosk/ cafe type places.
Seriously, leave it.
Two weeks is too long in London. Give yourself a day to get over jetlag, and 1-2 days to cover the major attractions. Then take the next ten days to travel around, and come back to london to a final sweep of interesting places, and get ready for the flight.
You can grab a train to Paris (France), and spend a day or two there - get another country in. Get a flight to Dublin, Cork or Belfast (45 mins) Yet another country.
mod parent up.
The first step is to find out what the business wants, and how much it is willing to pay. THEN you go out to find out what tech is appropriate/affordable to do it.
Ask the heads of each office, and the main business managers what they want the tech to do now, in a year and in three years. Do you have a business continuity plan that has to be allowed for. If you don't have a BC plan, now's a good time to have one done, before you buy a load of kit that may not do the job.
Once you have a list of business needs, and put them in a prioritised list (again the managers set the priority), you go out and look at what can do the job. Assuming you find a reasonable solution within budget, you need to plan the migration.
Protip: do not attempt to migrate everything in one go. Do it in steps, with breaks in between.
Proprotip: whatever your migration, be able to revert to the original solution in less than 8 hours - ie one working day.
Migration is the biggest gotcha - plan, plan and plan again. Do a dry run. Start with the least critical services. You do have backups, right? Fully tested backups, from ground zero? You do have all your network and infrastructure accurately and completely mapped out, and all configuration settings / files stored on paper and independent machines?
Both arguments for VM and KISS have their place - only you can decide. But when you do decide, make sure it's based on evidence, and will end up making the business better.
Don't forget Total Cost of Ownership - the shiny boxes may run faster, but will you have to hire two more techs to keep them running, or a new maintenance contract?
Don't forget training - for you, your staff and the end users. If you're putting shiney newness in place, people will need to know how to use it, and do their jobs at least as quickly as on the old solution. No use putting in shiny web4.0 uber cloud goodness, if the users end up spending an hour doing a job that used to take 5 minutes, because they don't know how to use it properly, or the interface doesn't easily work with their business processes.
good luck
"Executives" are interested in money - what earns money for the company, what costs money for the company, what can increase future money for the company, what prevents increasing future money for the company.
Think about the main things you are doing, or plan to do over the next week, month, quarter, year. Which of the four results (earn, cost, increase, decrease) do those things do? Can you mitigate (reduce) the negatives? Can you improve the positives? What are the costs (time, money, resources)? What are the impacts/benefits (save or increase time, money, resources)?
Here's a couple of examples:
"Our mail system is aging and is struggling with the current load. I estimate it causes up to two hours delay per employee per month. I plan to increase the memory and disk space. It will cost $x hundred, and take 3 days to implement. The benefit will be the increase in productivity and delay the need to buy an entire new server for two more years."
"Our finance dept is struggling to keep up with the number of invoices that need to be processed. With the CFO I am evaluating three new systems which can help automate the process. The cost of the system is $x in capital expenditure, and then $y in annual licence fees. The CFO estimates that it will reduce the time to invoice clients from 10 days to four days, and increase cash flow for the company."
So, think in terms of money. Think what business problems or opportunities that IT makes better (or worse). State the problem or opportunity, what you are doing / want to do, say what the impact of your proposal is / will be.
Stick to this basic formula, and you'll soon be seen as someone who brings answers and adds value, instead of the stereotypical geek who complains, costs money and does little of value.
22/7 ?
First of all, establish exactly what it is they are asking you for. 'Strategy' has to be one of the most abused words in the modern world. Is it really strategy - ie setting goals without defining how they are acheived? Is it policy - ie setting the framework of rules to work within while achieving the strategy? Or is it tactical advice - the nuts and bolts of how you actually implement the strategy and policy?
Assuming it is strategy, then ...
Second, define what you want IT to achieve - in terms of benefits and abilities, and what you want IT not to do - in terms of drawbacks and liabilities.
Third - prioritise the importance of each of the individual results from point two above.
Now you have a list of things you want IT to do, and you understand how to allocate funds and time, based on their priority. The next steps are to decide the policy to run them, and tactical implementation.
You'll get a lot of folks here saying things like "allow FOSS...deny " These aren't direct strategies. A strategy would be to allow solutions to be developed/deployed based on fitness for purpose. The conseqent policy would be to allow multiple OS / applications to be deployed within a controlled framework. The following tactic would be to assess what the user needs and can afford, identify what potential market solutions are out there and how much they cost (capex and opex) and pick the best.
+1 to the above.
As they're offering you a range of experiences, it would be beneficial to learn functional programming, procedural programming, parallel programming. Oh and lisp. If you get a good understanding of the similarities and differences of func vs procedural, and teh thought processes on how to solve problems with them, you'll do just fine. Parallel programming (SIMD / MIMD) is only going to become more and more important as the number of cores in common use rises.
The actual implementation of each functional / procedural language is largely irrelevant - it's learning how to think and solve problems in their respective paradigms.
LISP is a great teacher - derided for the brackets, it is incredibly powerful and based on extremely fundamental maths. Using a handful of operators, you can do the most amazing things.
2) Snow Leopard is not a service pack.
Even their own marketing calls it "fine tuning". Apple senior execs called it a refinement of Leopard, or words to that effect. It's a service pack.
... took out the express slot because not enough of their customers wanted it. I...never saw the use for it
It's a pro slot, used by pros, to connect pro kit - usually high end audio, video and storage. Remind me of the branding of this product again... oh yeah, pro!
How often does a MacBook Pro user replace their battery?
In my case, after just over a year - and that following recommended charge/discharge practices. Apple kindly sent me a replacement, as the first was an explosion risk. It died a little over a year later. My experience is not unusual for a Powerbook battery. The lack of easy access to replace the cell cheaply with a non-oem part is a strong disincentive.
Apple is pricing their notebooks more aggressive *and* improving the hardware
Apple is reducing the price of entry. It's arguable they are NOT improving the hardware (beyond normal Moore's Law) for the same price at the mid and high end prices. Cf express card loss, FW400 loss, discrete gfx loss. And even in their Pro line, they charging $30 for a lead to let you connect to any external display - not even a free HDMI slot. Last but not least, still offering only 2 USB slots, on the 15" models is a joke - especially as there's no express slot now. Use an external mouse, and now you can't plug in your external drive, as there's no spare slot for power. Use a mouse and a external card reader, and you're SOL to do anything else. I wanted to buy a MBP from this upgrade cycle. I won't - instead staying with a Powerbook G4 that's alot slower, but offers so much more in terms of usability. My hope is that APPL will correct some of these decisions in the next cycle. It's unlikely we'll go back to discrete batteries any time soon, but hopefully get what many users want - connectivity options.
tramiel's commodore?
hey, what have strippers ever done to deserve being classed with politicians?
If the blimp costs $20,000
In military purchasing, you'd barely get a washer for $20k, never mind an entire platform!
How much did they cost? When did you buy them? How much are they worth now. How much can you earn from using them? how much do they cost to run?
Add up all the costs, over 12 months, 24 months, 36 months. Add up all the potential revenue they'll earn.
If the first is bigger than the second, you're losing money - sell them now for as much as you can, cut your losses. If the revenue is bigger, you might consider using Net Present Value (look up the NPV function in your favorite spreadsheet) to determine if it's really a profit. If the NPV is negative or zero, sell. Only if the NPV is postive , and by more than a fistfull of dollars, AND you're confident about the numbers should you hang on to them.
Or can you donate them to a charity, and write them off for tax?
Rant: given that performance / price ratio is constantly improving, why would anyone ever ever ever buy hardware a second before they absolutely have a proven need for it to earn a buck? That's like buying fuel, and letting it evaporate in the desert sun.
why? because I dare negativelly criticise the whining, immature comments of a single soldier?
Did I negativelly criticise all members of the armed forces? No. Did I negativelly criticise the policy or practice which put him there? No.
I pointed out that the expectations and response of some serving personnel are radically different from the past. That's not to take away from the dirty difficult job that many serving folks do at the sharp end. Spot the difference.
Pick apart my argument - fine. Pick an ad hominem attack, and you're the loser.
And before anyone gets all high and mighty, remember that the vast majority of americans don't know where Afghanistan is, or why you're deployed there. If asked, most would say "Terr'ists". Not human rights, not preventing a narco state, not establishing democracy. Also, most Americans didn't complain when GWB diverted resources from the Afghan border - who were chasing a real terrorist called OB Laden. They didn't complain when vast numbers of troops where moved from Afghanistan, creating a power vacuum, thrown into a pointless war (politically, economically, militarily)his own father declined more than a decade earlier. That power vacuum enabled the Taliban to return, and insurgents from all over the globe to gather, so that Afghanistan now has a terrorist problem, that didn't exist before.
in the first world war, soldiers wrote home about the terrible carnage, the awful conditions, and how they wanted to go home. They wrote poetry and listened to jazz.
in the second world war, soldiers wrote home about the incredible pace of war, the awful conditions, fighting the tyrannical fascism of Germany, Italy and Japan, and how they wanted to go home. they wrote novels, and listened to dance music.
in the vietnam war, soldiers wrote home about the pointlessness of war, the awful conditions, the alienation being in a completely foreign culture where both sides saw you as an invader, and how they wanted to go home. they smoked dope and listened to The Doors.
You're posting on a web site, complaining your recreational toy hasn't turned up after a few weeks.
May i humbly suggest that your time is better spent reading some books, to enlighten you as to why you're in the position you are, and just how the hell you and your countrymen arrived there.
i'd suggest Steve Coll's "Ghost Wars: The Secret History of the CIA, Afghanistan and Bin Laden" - well written, and a modern perspective on the afghan condition. And for the longer historical perspective "Afghanistan: A Military History From Alexander The Great To The Fall Of The Taliban"
by Stephen Tanner. There are many other excellent books out there.
I'd also question your choice of laptop. For challenging conditions, with heat, sand, and a lot of bumps, I'd suggest a panasonic toughbook or other ruggedised solution. Unless of course, you're a REM who's several hundred clicks from any forward operating post, and have ready access to 24x7 electricity with no spikes, aircon and constant net access. Apologies if I've called that one wrong, but you're not exactly giving the impression of being at the sharp end of business out there.
The detail you provide in your question is telling. You discuss mostly the technical aspects (laptop spec, ports, etc.). You barely describe the rationale, or address how it will be perceived, only claiming that other in the company don't understand. You fail to set out the business benefit, or how you will pitch it to your seniors. You fail to set out the personal benefit - apart from the fact you've given everyone a shiny console.
So it's not clear why anyone would want it, or why anyone would approve it. it is clear that by failing to communicate to the rest of the company, people will arrive at their own conclusions, and they are likely to be ones that do not reflect well on you. This is not shaping up to be a McKinsey case study in how to execute an innovative reward scheme that will meet universal acclaim and cure cancer.
Have you had a bunch of your team actually ask for this? I thought not.
Go back to the basics. What are you trying to achieve? What are the potential solutions of meeting your goals. How much will it cost the company? What are the benefits for your team? What are the benefits for your company? What are the drawbacks for the team / company?
And anyone who says "google does it!" doesn't understand that (a) google hires a very very particular type of personality and (b) google has a very particular corporate culture which is geared to using alternative reward schemes. If you want those things, go work for google, or another company with similar values.
No-one can deny that with growing popularity of OS X that it becomes an increasingly attractive target. Malware writing works on similar economics to regular software: this implies that malware will exist but be a niche deployment. So it is a concern, but not the end of the world, or of Apple, as the world likes to regularly predict.
/less/ vulnerable than the mainstream desktop OS. The thesis that using an intel processor increases security risks is not true - OSen don't allow direct hardware access as such, and how many script kiddies write x86 microcode?. Running Windows on a IntelMac may potentially increase security probems, and reduce the Macintosh (not OS X) brand reputation for security. It depends on how the 'wall' between x86 file access and OSX file access is implemented.
The article was mixed in accuracy. Many Mac users believe themselves to be invulnerable - the truth is they are currently
Nothing in IT or anywhere else is 100%. Currently OS X is more secure in many areas than its competitors. To maintain or improve on this, constant vigilence and innovation are required by Apple, ISVs and most importantly users.
Repeat after me - there are no degrees kelvin, only Kelvin. Degrees centigrade and farenheit yes, Kelvin no.
You're a techie, but this is no reason to start off with a solely tech discussion. As a former techie, and more recently a consultant, here's my spin:
(1) get your boss to write down the business reasons for the change. Not technical reasons, business - cost savings, productivity increases, etc.
If there aren't well defined reasons, then you can't technically come up with a solution that's much use, as they haven't defined the problem for you.
(2) Get your boss to write down the goal of the project. This is usually a single statement. Eg if you worked in an oil company the goal might be "deploy a pipeline from turkey to russia that can carry 5m L oil per day". If he won't write it down, you write it, and get him to approve it formally.
If he can't or won't, then you don't have a baseline to judge all future decisions against. I.e. whwnever you have a question or problem, ask yourself does it help or hinder this goal.
(3) Figure out what the parameters of the deployment should be: think what, when, why, how, where. E.g. it should be completed within X months, should not cost more than $Y, should be availble in Z% of offices, should not take more time to complete a transaction than the exisiting system.
These parameters help define what you should and shouldn't do, how much resource to devote etc. Basically they give you the rules of the game.
(4) Figure out who the stakeholders are - ie who is affected, and who has power within the company. This typically includes the fincial director at a high level, and end-suers at the low level. Speak to the FD - he often has final say over everything, and has his own set of expectations different to the IT director. Speak to the users - they can suggest problems that need to be fixed, and things that work and they want kept.
Knowing the stakeholders and keeping them informed and happy is the biggest challenge.
No offense, but you say you're a 7m technician intern. This makes me suspicious they putting a core business function in your hands that if fucked up could kill the company.
I suggest after doing basic research, going back to the IT director and saying something along the lines of "the total cost of switching, impacts on the business and risk to business interruption are not clear. Yes the current solution might look expensive on paper, but it might be less expensive than swapping. We need to scope this in a bit more depth, and possibly engage outside experts for a small study to understand costs, benefits and impacts." then hand him a short list of potential expert companies that can help. by this stage you'll have called these companies, and in general terms described your problem, and checked out if than can help, how and will it cost. You'll have names, phone numbers and email addresses for all of them.
I agree with the others when they say EDI isn't something to take on alone. Use the experts. If you've never project managed before on any scale, I suggest you get help with that too - internally or externally.
Best of luck. this can be a great learning experience.
Ps if your company throws a wobbly at any of the things I've suggested above, tehn that means they're not serious. Find yourself another job, they don't pay you enough to deal with bad management on top of everything.
Sherlock was a reduced version of the V-Twin search technology Apple Research spent many years working on. This was at least a decade ahead of Microsoft.
r ec.nist.gov/pubs/trec5/papers/apple.ps.gz+apple+v- twin&hl=en&start=9&client=safari for detail on v-twin
Unfortunately Apple Research and V-Twin were canned in a reshuffle and cost-cutting exercise.
See http://66.102.9.104/search?q=cache:XUmY7a8UyLoJ:t