The government is going through so much trouble to slap down Microsoft for being a monopoly. They should look for an alternative to Microsoft, whether it's Open Source or not. But if they go Open Source, they have more chance of being able to re-use the hardware they already have.
I'd start by posting for advertised jobs. After that, maybe email jobs@foo.com, but only after checking the company and customizing your cover letter. Possibly a few phone calls, and some snail mail. Make sure that each email is to a single person, not to a mailing list.
I'm sure there are other ways, but this is a start (and what I'm currently doing).
There are some websites that offer to send your resume to interested parties. Some of them send your info to employers that have signed up with the service, in standard headhunter style. Some send your resume to newsgroups in the *.jobs.* hierarchies. These ones almost always seem to have bad aim, as regional jobs newsgroups are flooded with postings from other areas. I wouldn't be surprised if other services spam your resume without your knowledge. Although this should reflect badly on the posting service, it is more likely to reflect on the person whose name is in the message. That would be the job seeker whose resume was spammed without his/her permission.
Yes, but the browser that gets the Netscape label isn't the same as Mozilla. For some reason, AOL stripped it down some before releasing it. They are suing for damages resulting from the loss of revenue due to Netscape, when what they call Netscape can't compete. If they were to try pushing Mozilla instead, it would be reasonable for them to want to take IE out of Windows. But if they're doing it solely for revenue, their product needs to be fixed first.
Before they try to have Microsoft remove IE from the default install, AOL will have to improve Netscape. Otherwise, people will just re-install IE separately, and show that they think IE is better on its own merits, not just because Microsoft is pushing it.
OpenBSD's main tenet is that security is the most important part of the distribution. This rogue distribution is using OpenBSD's name (is this allowed? Anyone?); is it still following OpenBSD's strictures regarding security, such as a full source audit before release?
When you do this, make sure of one thing - ensure that you make it absolutely clear that you are forwarding an email you received. You don't want them coming to sue you for spamming and copying DVDs when you're trying to report someone.
Note that it wasn't a personal computer that they monitored in this case. It was a portable military computer. Odds are they discovered the porn during a regular security audit. Since it goes against military regs to use military computers for porn, the officer was disciplined.
Possibly, if the stores do this knowingly. However, if it is sent to them as a CD from their supplier, then their supplier should be accountable, not the vendor.
If, by some amazing chance, you actually get a response, please post it, be it on Slashdot, Usenet, a webpage, or something else. And, of course, let us all know where it is.
It's supposed to be for the passengers. However, he also admits (in the FAQ) that he does use it sometimes while driving. And if these started making it into Joe Driver's car, you know that drivers will start using it, no matter the intention. It already happens - I quite regularly see people using their laptops in cars.
Did RedHat breech trust with CERT? There was an exploit, sent out to vendors, along with an agreement not to leak it until the 3rd.
If there was a formal agreement not to release the information ahead of schedule, should this not be seen as a mark against RedHat?
Unfortunately, there is only one punishment I can see for this. RedHat should be removed from the mailing list for a specific amount of time, but not permanently.
The biggest problem I see with that is that it would hurt the customers, which is what we don't want.
Does anybody else have an idea of a suitable remedy?
I agree with you completely. Which is why, in response to another poster, I reccomended that the license be not based on a test, but on the body of all the work you've done. Require re-certification every N years. The review board looks at the code written between re-certs. They determine whether it is worthy of re-certification.
The main problem I see with this is with engineers not being allowed to show their work due to NDAs. Not quite sure how to get around that.
Commercial software can't be critical software? I wasn't aware of that.
If you believe your software is mission-critical, look for the "Certified Engineer" label I suggested in the parent post. If you have the choice between a cheap, uncertified word processor and an expensive, certified one, weigh your needs. If it needs to be rock-solid, get the certified one. If you can handle the occasional crash, get the cheap one.
That's why I suggested mandatory recertifications. Perhaps something besides a test can be used. What is the entire body of Joh Hacker's previous work? What has been written since the last recert board?
Besides, requiring Eng certification will not prevent Open Source software
If it is publicized that certification is required to be a programmer, will it be similarly publicized that it only applies to certain software? Or will the media just say that all programmers need certification? What will that do to prospective programmers?
Commercial, off-the-shelf software, doesn't require licenced engineers. Shouldn't have the EULA restrictions, but that's a different kettle of fish.
However, only licensed engineers and programmers are allowed to write critical software. They could write regular software as well; it could be a selling point to know that the software is written by someone who both knows what (s)he's doing, and is willing to take accountability for its failures.
The article is slashdotted, so this is based on the writeup.
Requiring a license to be a programmer is a bad thing. If you think it will improve software quality, you're mistaken. Think I'm crazy? How many software contributers have an engineering certification? Sorry, no cert, no programming. No open-source software.
OK, so let's change the rules a bit. "You must be certified in order to write commercial software". You think that will help anything? Who determines what classifies as commercial software? Is my Mandrake CD commercial software? If so, does that mean all the software on it, including the free software, is now commercial? Not good.
However, what if there's a non-commercial certification process. Run, not by RedHat or Microsoft, but by a vendor-independent group of engineers. You prove to them that you are a capable engineer/programmer/whatever. They give you a certificate that actually means something. Perhaps require the certification to be re-written every N years.
Now, companies can have a certification that says this person is a software engineer. Not a Microsoft-certified software engineer. Not a RedHat-certified software engineer. An engineer-certified software engineer. No commercial influence, transferrable skills, and a large skill set.
I just finished reading the Cathedral and the Bazaar. It talks about Popclient becoming Fetchmail. The way this happened was ESR sent patches to the author and found out that the project was almost dead. This led to the original author handing over the reins to ESR.
You're missing one important point. When normal people (and some geeks) see the word "computer", common sense goes out the window. So it is quite possible that avoiding tapping on the computer will be seen differently than avoiding tapping on the phone.
Slashdot Mirror
The government is going through so much trouble to slap down Microsoft for being a monopoly. They should look for an alternative to Microsoft, whether it's Open Source or not. But if they go Open Source, they have more chance of being able to re-use the hardware they already have.
I'd start by posting for advertised jobs. After that, maybe email jobs@foo.com, but only after checking the company and customizing your cover letter. Possibly a few phone calls, and some snail mail. Make sure that each email is to a single person, not to a mailing list.
I'm sure there are other ways, but this is a start (and what I'm currently doing).
There are some websites that offer to send your resume to interested parties. Some of them send your info to employers that have signed up with the service, in standard headhunter style. Some send your resume to newsgroups in the *.jobs.* hierarchies. These ones almost always seem to have bad aim, as regional jobs newsgroups are flooded with postings from other areas. I wouldn't be surprised if other services spam your resume without your knowledge. Although this should reflect badly on the posting service, it is more likely to reflect on the person whose name is in the message. That would be the job seeker whose resume was spammed without his/her permission.
Yes, but the browser that gets the Netscape label isn't the same as Mozilla. For some reason, AOL stripped it down some before releasing it. They are suing for damages resulting from the loss of revenue due to Netscape, when what they call Netscape can't compete. If they were to try pushing Mozilla instead, it would be reasonable for them to want to take IE out of Windows. But if they're doing it solely for revenue, their product needs to be fixed first.
Before they try to have Microsoft remove IE from the default install, AOL will have to improve Netscape. Otherwise, people will just re-install IE separately, and show that they think IE is better on its own merits, not just because Microsoft is pushing it.
OpenBSD's main tenet is that security is the most important part of the distribution. This rogue distribution is using OpenBSD's name (is this allowed? Anyone?); is it still following OpenBSD's strictures regarding security, such as a full source audit before release?
When you do this, make sure of one thing - ensure that you make it absolutely clear that you are forwarding an email you received. You don't want them coming to sue you for spamming and copying DVDs when you're trying to report someone.
Note that it wasn't a personal computer that they monitored in this case. It was a portable military computer. Odds are they discovered the porn during a regular security audit. Since it goes against military regs to use military computers for porn, the officer was disciplined.
Possibly, if the stores do this knowingly. However, if it is sent to them as a CD from their supplier, then their supplier should be accountable, not the vendor.
If, by some amazing chance, you actually get a response, please post it, be it on Slashdot, Usenet, a webpage, or something else. And, of course, let us all know where it is.
It's supposed to be for the passengers. However, he also admits (in the FAQ) that he does use it sometimes while driving. And if these started making it into Joe Driver's car, you know that drivers will start using it, no matter the intention. It already happens - I quite regularly see people using their laptops in cars.
Did RedHat breech trust with CERT? There was an exploit, sent out to vendors, along with an agreement not to leak it until the 3rd.
If there was a formal agreement not to release the information ahead of schedule, should this not be seen as a mark against RedHat?
Unfortunately, there is only one punishment I can see for this. RedHat should be removed from the mailing list for a specific amount of time, but not permanently.
The biggest problem I see with that is that it would hurt the customers, which is what we don't want.
Does anybody else have an idea of a suitable remedy?
Or, better yet, get a lawyer to write it for you.
You mean like Canada, the home nation of the person whose comment you replied to?
I agree with you completely. Which is why, in response to another poster, I reccomended that the license be not based on a test, but on the body of all the work you've done. Require re-certification every N years. The review board looks at the code written between re-certs. They determine whether it is worthy of re-certification.
The main problem I see with this is with engineers not being allowed to show their work due to NDAs. Not quite sure how to get around that.
If you believe your software is mission-critical, look for the "Certified Engineer" label I suggested in the parent post. If you have the choice between a cheap, uncertified word processor and an expensive, certified one, weigh your needs. If it needs to be rock-solid, get the certified one. If you can handle the occasional crash, get the cheap one.
That's why I suggested mandatory recertifications. Perhaps something besides a test can be used. What is the entire body of Joh Hacker's previous work? What has been written since the last recert board?
I also don't like exams. Too artificial for me.
If it is publicized that certification is required to be a programmer, will it be similarly publicized that it only applies to certain software? Or will the media just say that all programmers need certification? What will that do to prospective programmers?
How 'bout a compromise?
Commercial, off-the-shelf software, doesn't require licenced engineers. Shouldn't have the EULA restrictions, but that's a different kettle of fish.
However, only licensed engineers and programmers are allowed to write critical software. They could write regular software as well; it could be a selling point to know that the software is written by someone who both knows what (s)he's doing, and is willing to take accountability for its failures.
(Emphasis added)
Yes, you can fix your own radios. You'd be allowed to write your own software. But would you be allowed to write it commercially?
IMHO, a real engineer has a transferrable skill set. An MCSE does not give you this.
The article is slashdotted, so this is based on the writeup.
Requiring a license to be a programmer is a bad thing. If you think it will improve software quality, you're mistaken. Think I'm crazy? How many software contributers have an engineering certification? Sorry, no cert, no programming. No open-source software.
OK, so let's change the rules a bit. "You must be certified in order to write commercial software". You think that will help anything? Who determines what classifies as commercial software? Is my Mandrake CD commercial software? If so, does that mean all the software on it, including the free software, is now commercial? Not good.
However, what if there's a non-commercial certification process. Run, not by RedHat or Microsoft, but by a vendor-independent group of engineers. You prove to them that you are a capable engineer/programmer/whatever. They give you a certificate that actually means something. Perhaps require the certification to be re-written every N years.
Now, companies can have a certification that says this person is a software engineer. Not a Microsoft-certified software engineer. Not a RedHat-certified software engineer. An engineer-certified software engineer. No commercial influence, transferrable skills, and a large skill set.
I just finished reading the Cathedral and the Bazaar. It talks about Popclient becoming Fetchmail. The way this happened was ESR sent patches to the author and found out that the project was almost dead. This led to the original author handing over the reins to ESR.
You're missing one important point. When normal people (and some geeks) see the word "computer", common sense goes out the window. So it is quite possible that avoiding tapping on the computer will be seen differently than avoiding tapping on the phone.