Not trolling here but, you have to notice that there are 7 general, 6 windows, and 7 unix vulnerabilities.
IIS is bad, but Unix admins that don't patch BIND and SendMail are worse. The IIS versions change every year or so and the patches come fast and furious, but SendMail and BIND have had stable versions and patches for a while.
Almost everyone reading this will admit that it takes a bit more expertise to get SendMail and BIND up and running than IIS (which is installed by default in Win2kSrv). Therefore the admins with more expertise should be held MORE accountable since they have greater responsibility by running BIND and SendMail.
I can't even tell you how many ADMINS I have met in corporate who say things like, "But all the upper-lower case, numbers, &$% stuff is hard to remember."
It reminds me of the them song to the TV show from the early 80s.
"The Greatest American Hero (Believe it Or Not)" by Mike Post and Stephen Geyer, sung by Joey Scarbury
Believe it or not
I'm walking on air
I never thought I could feel so free-ee-ee
Flying away
On a wing and a prayer
Who could it be?
Believe it or not, it's just me
Doesn't this remind anyone of the fremin suits from Dune? I know they were not electric, but they used heat and motion to purify the waist water from the body.
It would be more efficient to just use mechanical (kinetic) energy and heat to power the devices than to convert it into electricity, but it is unlikely.
The sad part is that US will not have wide acceptance (like today's digital cell network) of 3G for at least 2 years after Japan based on the current plans to use 2.5G as a stepping stone. That makes it at least 5 years away.
I got Sprint PCS when digital service was pretty new (3-4 yrs ago?) and the reception was crystal clear... as long as I stood still and did some funky yoga moves to align the antenna. The service is much better in NJ and NY today. Based on that timeline, 3G service in the US won't be any good until at least 2006.
Agreed. Training would have to be KDE based (for example) with sections on KOffice (for example) in order for the users to get anything out of it. Standardization is the key. Customizing and idividualizing desktops causes nightmares for IT support staff.
The example of Largo from other posts is good, but people should realize that the admins had the desktops locked down so that only minimal changes could be made. They were also using terminals rather than PCs. They had a good set of repetative common tasks (being government and all) so standards were not a big issue. Many companies have a difficult time setting standards like this unless the order comes from the top and is led by example. This applies to any IT change(or ay dept for that matter) that affects many people.
One of my friends from college works on nuclear missiles warheads. When they chuckle and tell you it's classified, they generally mean that it's classified. Another of my friends is an engineer on nuclear subs. I asked him about some technical stuff when we had lunch one day. Half the conversation was classified.
Some stuff that's classified is stupid, like who worked in what office during the Vietnam War, but some of the stuff is serious, like how deep can a certain class of sub go.
Re:Al Gore, an intellect by all accounts? I disagr
on
Bobby Fischer Online?
·
· Score: 1
I must challenge your challenges. You make the statement "Gore is at most a mediocre intellect." You then site examples such as his "speaking abilities", "use of diction", "analytical abilities", and the ever popular "he wasn't even a good student."
Those are all well and good statements, but I must ask who would have a good intellect? Bobby Fischer(the subject of this thread)? Bill Gates? Alan Turing? Walt Disney? Mozart?
I don't consider myself to be an intellectual, but I do consider myself to be among the educated elite. I was having a conversation about tax breaks for poor people with a Princeton physics PhD, a geologist, a BFA graphic designer, and myself (materials engineer). I brought up the point that although we may have all been poor at some point in our life, we have very little perspective when it comes to issues like welfare.
My point is that I have spoken in front of several hundred peers on several occasions. It is not easy and once I even said, "Oh shit" into the mic when my first slide of a presentation was backwards. I had the balls to stay up there and continue. I even pulled a couple of jokes out of my ass. Life in the spotlight is not easy. Gore and Bobby Fischer should be looked upon with amazement that they can do what they do since 99.9999% of the people could not.
I agree with your conclusion. Despite the example in my earlier post, I do think the individual's rights are completely ignored by both the government and businesses.
I disagree, however, with your analysis. You start by writing about individuals not equating to software, but then you start comparing them to 'a security company'. I tried to be clear in my original post that I do not consider individuals to be held to the same standards as businesses (or governments or societies) unless they have great responsibility.
Just like opening source code for a firewall product has the risk of allowing a cracker to exploit a hole, giving out your address or birthdate or social security number has the risk of some identity thief to exploit you.
I have to draw a correlation here. Bare with me. I will use security softare as an example, but any softare will do.
Many who read slashdot, inluding me, would agree that open source security software like firewalls and IDS is a good idea. It allows coders to dig through and find the flaws as an evolutionary process. The software has a great responsibility of protecting out network and thus should be open to criticism of failure and flaws. By exposing those flaws, the software is made stronger in every successive version. The software is only held accountable by those that use it. If they feel that it is not good enough, they can modify the code to improve it, they can just wallow in self pity and do nothing, or they can stop using it alltogether and choose a different software package.
Covering the flaws in software with laws and government regulation only slows the process of making better software. Closed source software only gives two of the three options listed above. If you don't like the software, you can wallow in self pity and do nothing, or you can stop using it alltogether and choose a different software package. The maker of the software package in this case is held accountable to two groups this time, but the groups are linked financially: the shareholders and the users of the software. If the users revolt, then the shareholders will also revolt. If the company is private (no public stock) then the users are alone.
By the logic above, an individual should by that logic want to divulge all their information to others for the purpose of making themselves better individuals. Open the source and let some people poke around and give advice. The problem is that if we fail, we are only accountable to those that depend on us. If we have great responsibility (like protecting the network) then we should be open to some poking around through the code to make things better. If we are only responsible for ourselves then we have every right to deny people access to our code. If the society in which we live demands access to our code as a condition of membership, then we choose to either give the code or leave the society.
Having worked for a company that does statistical anaysis on prescription drug use, I would not trust the pharmaceutical companies. By extension, the HMOs also have access to this information. The really scary part is that because health insurance companies and financial companies can and will merge legally (in the US), it will be possible for the manager approving your mortgage loan to see if you have any serious illnesses that might cause you to become unemployed, thus making you a high risk candidate.
I am sad about AIDS, but I am not little. I am ignorant about Brazil, but I am not a fool.
My point about mentioning the US and Europe was that AIDS does not care where you live, and neither does ingnorance. Education about HIV and AIDS has not stopped it in the US and Europe. I don't doubt that Brazil has done something about it, but the idea of quarantine was over the top.
Infectious when passing bodily fluids (like blood and semen) between individuals. If it was airborne then quarantine might make sense, but sex and needles are not reasons alone. Education of the people is needed. people in the US and Europe barely understand HIV. If that is any measure of what it is like in the sprawling tin roof ghettoes of Sao Paolo, then Brazil needs to build schools instead of fences.
This was predicted several months ago in the pharmaceutical industry. They are even MORE concerned about this happening in countries in Africa. The countries that have the highest rates of AIDS will likely start manufacturing and distributing drugs to not only people in their own country but to other countries as well.
I doubt that it will hurt their profits in the short term because they don't sell huge amounts of the drugs in the poorer countries anyway, but it sets a (dangerous) precedent for other countries to follow. The point that some people seem to miss is that if they fail to adequately QA the drugs, most of the people will die anyway. Making drugs is not as simple as getting a formula and mixing up the igredients. This is not baking cookies.
The Brazilian government needs to look at addressing problem by preventing new cases of HIV also. They need to promote safe sex and maybe start distributing condoms and disposable syringes or something.
Life was so much easier for us Amish folk when roads were unpaved and "difficult" to transverse. The advent of the so-called 'automobile' has made our life Satan's funhouse.
Which simply proves the point that secretaries can and should use linux.:oP
My mother made me learn how to type one summer on the IBM PC-AT. I will never forget that fantastic transition from typewriter to PC... backspace is for wussies.
what bugs me about this (and dotcoms) is that the 'normal' business model (the one i learned in college) works on a five year profitability timetable. the idea is that if you can not turn a profit in the first five years, then your business plan does not work. some dotcoms came and went within three years! how does one
A. get money for a business plan
B. spend 25% of it on stupid stuff
C. not get shot by investors
broadband providers (other than the bells or existing cable providers) seem to be dropping like flies. i know that @home is in bed with att, but what is wrong with @home's business plan? are they trying to grow too fast? are they buying expensive chairs? does it cost more to provide the service than they are charging?
i personally know that covad has an excuse, because i have dealt with verizon (bellatlantic, nynex, and nj bell before them) on several occasions. in nyc the folks doing installations have been known to disconnect existing service while installing new service and then claim that they will have to charge you to fix the existing service. covad got shafted left and right by verizon.
until the telecommunication providers are deregulated and re-regulated with realistic rules (many are still from the breakup of ATT 17 years ago) there will be little government help with consumer broadband needs.
Slashdot Mirror
Not trolling here but, you have to notice that there are 7 general, 6 windows, and 7 unix vulnerabilities.
IIS is bad, but Unix admins that don't patch BIND and SendMail are worse. The IIS versions change every year or so and the patches come fast and furious, but SendMail and BIND have had stable versions and patches for a while.
Almost everyone reading this will admit that it takes a bit more expertise to get SendMail and BIND up and running than IIS (which is installed by default in Win2kSrv). Therefore the admins with more expertise should be held MORE accountable since they have greater responsibility by running BIND and SendMail.
I can't even tell you how many ADMINS I have met in corporate who say things like, "But all the upper-lower case, numbers, &$% stuff is hard to remember."
It is so sad.
It reminds me of the them song to the TV show from the early 80s.
"The Greatest American Hero (Believe it Or Not)" by Mike Post and Stephen Geyer, sung by Joey Scarbury
Believe it or not
I'm walking on air
I never thought I could feel so free-ee-ee
Flying away
On a wing and a prayer
Who could it be?
Believe it or not, it's just me
Patent number is RE36801
moderator on a no-caffeine rampage
Doesn't this remind anyone of the fremin suits from Dune? I know they were not electric, but they used heat and motion to purify the waist water from the body.
It would be more efficient to just use mechanical (kinetic) energy and heat to power the devices than to convert it into electricity, but it is unlikely.
The sad part is that US will not have wide acceptance (like today's digital cell network) of 3G for at least 2 years after Japan based on the current plans to use 2.5G as a stepping stone. That makes it at least 5 years away.
I got Sprint PCS when digital service was pretty new (3-4 yrs ago?) and the reception was crystal clear... as long as I stood still and did some funky yoga moves to align the antenna. The service is much better in NJ and NY today. Based on that timeline, 3G service in the US won't be any good until at least 2006.
Agreed. Training would have to be KDE based (for example) with sections on KOffice (for example) in order for the users to get anything out of it. Standardization is the key. Customizing and idividualizing desktops causes nightmares for IT support staff.
The example of Largo from other posts is good, but people should realize that the admins had the desktops locked down so that only minimal changes could be made. They were also using terminals rather than PCs. They had a good set of repetative common tasks (being government and all) so standards were not a big issue. Many companies have a difficult time setting standards like this unless the order comes from the top and is led by example. This applies to any IT change(or ay dept for that matter) that affects many people.
Genessee? Only if it's cream ale!
"News for nerds. Stuff that matters."
I think it is news for nerds. I also think that it matters. That is enough of a reason to post.
One of my friends from college works on nuclear missiles warheads. When they chuckle and tell you it's classified, they generally mean that it's classified. Another of my friends is an engineer on nuclear subs. I asked him about some technical stuff when we had lunch one day. Half the conversation was classified.
Some stuff that's classified is stupid, like who worked in what office during the Vietnam War, but some of the stuff is serious, like how deep can a certain class of sub go.
I must challenge your challenges. You make the statement "Gore is at most a mediocre intellect." You then site examples such as his "speaking abilities", "use of diction", "analytical abilities", and the ever popular "he wasn't even a good student."
Those are all well and good statements, but I must ask who would have a good intellect? Bobby Fischer(the subject of this thread)? Bill Gates? Alan Turing? Walt Disney? Mozart?
I don't consider myself to be an intellectual, but I do consider myself to be among the educated elite. I was having a conversation about tax breaks for poor people with a Princeton physics PhD, a geologist, a BFA graphic designer, and myself (materials engineer). I brought up the point that although we may have all been poor at some point in our life, we have very little perspective when it comes to issues like welfare.
My point is that I have spoken in front of several hundred peers on several occasions. It is not easy and once I even said, "Oh shit" into the mic when my first slide of a presentation was backwards. I had the balls to stay up there and continue. I even pulled a couple of jokes out of my ass. Life in the spotlight is not easy. Gore and Bobby Fischer should be looked upon with amazement that they can do what they do since 99.9999% of the people could not.
I agree with your conclusion. Despite the example in my earlier post, I do think the individual's rights are completely ignored by both the government and businesses.
I disagree, however, with your analysis. You start by writing about individuals not equating to software, but then you start comparing them to 'a security company'. I tried to be clear in my original post that I do not consider individuals to be held to the same standards as businesses (or governments or societies) unless they have great responsibility.
Just like opening source code for a firewall product has the risk of allowing a cracker to exploit a hole, giving out your address or birthdate or social security number has the risk of some identity thief to exploit you.
thank you, kind AC. no one knows my pain of not having ascii parrots.
;oD
how lame of me. i respond to my own post.
i was moderated down as redundant for a joke that i posted because someone else made the same joke later.
i was moderated down as redundant for a joke that i posted because someone else made the same joke later.
now that was redundant. moderate for the fun, not for the money. can't we all just get along.
everytime anyone links to atheos, the server is crushed. i could not even see the lovely ascii parrots the last time the site got slashdotted.
;ob
mmmm...BeOS
I have to draw a correlation here. Bare with me. I will use security softare as an example, but any softare will do.
Many who read slashdot, inluding me, would agree that open source security software like firewalls and IDS is a good idea. It allows coders to dig through and find the flaws as an evolutionary process. The software has a great responsibility of protecting out network and thus should be open to criticism of failure and flaws. By exposing those flaws, the software is made stronger in every successive version. The software is only held accountable by those that use it. If they feel that it is not good enough, they can modify the code to improve it, they can just wallow in self pity and do nothing, or they can stop using it alltogether and choose a different software package.
Covering the flaws in software with laws and government regulation only slows the process of making better software. Closed source software only gives two of the three options listed above. If you don't like the software, you can wallow in self pity and do nothing, or you can stop using it alltogether and choose a different software package. The maker of the software package in this case is held accountable to two groups this time, but the groups are linked financially: the shareholders and the users of the software. If the users revolt, then the shareholders will also revolt. If the company is private (no public stock) then the users are alone.
By the logic above, an individual should by that logic want to divulge all their information to others for the purpose of making themselves better individuals. Open the source and let some people poke around and give advice. The problem is that if we fail, we are only accountable to those that depend on us. If we have great responsibility (like protecting the network) then we should be open to some poking around through the code to make things better. If we are only responsible for ourselves then we have every right to deny people access to our code. If the society in which we live demands access to our code as a condition of membership, then we choose to either give the code or leave the society.
Having worked for a company that does statistical anaysis on prescription drug use, I would not trust the pharmaceutical companies. By extension, the HMOs also have access to this information. The really scary part is that because health insurance companies and financial companies can and will merge legally (in the US), it will be possible for the manager approving your mortgage loan to see if you have any serious illnesses that might cause you to become unemployed, thus making you a high risk candidate.
I might be falling for a AC troll here but...
I think you missed my point.
I am sad about AIDS, but I am not little. I am ignorant about Brazil, but I am not a fool.
My point about mentioning the US and Europe was that AIDS does not care where you live, and neither does ingnorance. Education about HIV and AIDS has not stopped it in the US and Europe. I don't doubt that Brazil has done something about it, but the idea of quarantine was over the top.
That was my point.
Infectious when passing bodily fluids (like blood and semen) between individuals. If it was airborne then quarantine might make sense, but sex and needles are not reasons alone. Education of the people is needed. people in the US and Europe barely understand HIV. If that is any measure of what it is like in the sprawling tin roof ghettoes of Sao Paolo, then Brazil needs to build schools instead of fences.
This was predicted several months ago in the pharmaceutical industry. They are even MORE concerned about this happening in countries in Africa. The countries that have the highest rates of AIDS will likely start manufacturing and distributing drugs to not only people in their own country but to other countries as well.
I doubt that it will hurt their profits in the short term because they don't sell huge amounts of the drugs in the poorer countries anyway, but it sets a (dangerous) precedent for other countries to follow. The point that some people seem to miss is that if they fail to adequately QA the drugs, most of the people will die anyway. Making drugs is not as simple as getting a formula and mixing up the igredients. This is not baking cookies.
The Brazilian government needs to look at addressing problem by preventing new cases of HIV also. They need to promote safe sex and maybe start distributing condoms and disposable syringes or something.
Either way, this is a sad situation.
Let me clarify 'most coders'. I mean the the ones that run visual development tools on windows. In case someone forgot that they are the majority. :ob
Life was so much easier for us Amish folk when roads were unpaved and "difficult" to transverse. The advent of the so-called 'automobile' has made our life Satan's funhouse.
Which simply proves the point that secretaries can and should use linux. :oP
My mother made me learn how to type one summer on the IBM PC-AT. I will never forget that fantastic transition from typewriter to PC... backspace is for wussies.
what bugs me about this (and dotcoms) is that the 'normal' business model (the one i learned in college) works on a five year profitability timetable. the idea is that if you can not turn a profit in the first five years, then your business plan does not work. some dotcoms came and went within three years! how does one
A. get money for a business plan
B. spend 25% of it on stupid stuff
C. not get shot by investors
broadband providers (other than the bells or existing cable providers) seem to be dropping like flies. i know that @home is in bed with att, but what is wrong with @home's business plan? are they trying to grow too fast? are they buying expensive chairs? does it cost more to provide the service than they are charging?
i personally know that covad has an excuse, because i have dealt with verizon (bellatlantic, nynex, and nj bell before them) on several occasions. in nyc the folks doing installations have been known to disconnect existing service while installing new service and then claim that they will have to charge you to fix the existing service. covad got shafted left and right by verizon.
until the telecommunication providers are deregulated and re-regulated with realistic rules (many are still from the breakup of ATT 17 years ago) there will be little government help with consumer broadband needs.