There's a problem with that. Education begets better employment
That's always true. It's true sometimes. It's true when the education is needed to fill a void in the current workforce. This is constantly changing.
When Education is sought for something that doesn't get better employment it could possibly hurt the person if they can't afford it. And if this is done in high enough numbers then it could hurt the entire society. In 2013 only 27% of US graduates had job related to their major. That seems like it could be a lot of wasted money, doesn't it?
If there are 3.7M students that graduate every year and the average college cost is $15k/yr (based on public college costs, private is more than double). That's $55.5B/yr. Think of all that student debt that is created that bogs down the economy. Students are essentially graduating with a home mortgage. If they don't get a decent job soon after graduating they can be financially devastated.
It would be easier, and probably more secure to block it at the firewall than on individual computers. At least for desktop computers that don't leave the network.
This isn't a new thing. It's been around for a while.
And it's not just about paying the ransom. The ransom is usually a very small amount of money in the whole scheme of things. It's about being able to conduct business like paying your vendors and employees while your system is down.
Either you don't allow any mobile device on your corporate network, or you set strict mobile management policies that don't allow the installation of *ANY* application by the end user and push all mobile apps through the mobile management platform.
I chose the first option. There's no need for any of our phones or tablets to be on the corporate network.
Just curious, but is anyone running SSL decryption on their networks where they could see this traffic leaving the network? Would they be able to see the traffic in plain text to see what is being reported to Microsoft?
Really, Microsoft? You're preaching about IT security when you have completely taken some Windows 10 security decisions *OUT* of the hands of IT departments? We can no longer disable the Windows App Store in Windows 10 Pro, thanks to you. But if we still want that feature we have to update our licenses from Pro to Enterprise.....because SECURITY. Right? It's not about money, right?
Alright, if you don't care about billing and only how traffic is treated/shaped, how about you sign up for BiasNetISP. Where the BASIC plan is dirt cheap and affordable to all. But it restricts access to only a handful of websites: Facebook, Foxnews, Google, ESPN360, and the homepage of the church of the latter day saints. It also restricts any other Internet traffic other than web access. Shell out another $20/mo for Netflix traffic on their PREMIUM service. But hey! They pay lip-service to network neutrality and if you pay an extra $10K a year for ULTIMATE service, you get full unrestricted Internet access.
Long story short, traffic is restricted for some of their customers. That IS affecting how traffic is being treated in a very non-neutral "We get to decide where traffic goes" sort of way. Once the gatekeepers try and control what roads you use, they can abuse that power to squeeze money out of you.
You completed turned around my point. I don't want traffic shaped or blocked. But if someone is going to get unmetered access to a certain service, I don't really care.
You're falling for the "zero rating" marketing spin.
Imagine a health insurance plan where everybody pays $50, but fat people have to pay $10 extra. Reaction: WTF?!!? That's not fair! You can't do that!!!
So they re-imagine the health insurance plan where everybody pays $60, but "health conscious" people can get a $10 discount. Reaction: That's cool, sure wish I went to the gym more:eats more cheetos:
GP is saying these are the same damn thing, it's just that they have different marketing spins. You are eating cheetos, saying that the second plan is just fine, because it doesn't affect you.
But their rates didn't change for AT&T and T-moble. So what's the problem?
I recorded some live performances to cassettes with Dolby S before I had the ability to record to hard drive. I was amazed at the difference, and in side-by-side comparisons I liked it better than minidisc. I also used DAT, which was superior to everything.
Alright, if you don't care about billing and only how traffic is treated/shaped, how about you sign up for BiasNetISP. Where the BASIC plan is dirt cheap and affordable to all. But it restricts access to only a handful of websites: Facebook, Foxnews, Google, ESPN360, and the homepage of the church of the latter day saints. It also restricts any other Internet traffic other than web access. Shell out another $20/mo for Netflix traffic on their PREMIUM service. But hey! They pay lip-service to network neutrality and if you pay an extra $10K a year for ULTIMATE service, you get full unrestricted Internet access.
Long story short, traffic is restricted for some of their customers. That IS affecting how traffic is being treated in a very non-neutral "We get to decide where traffic goes" sort of way. Once the gatekeepers try and control what roads you use, they can abuse that power to squeeze money out of you.
You completed turned around my point. I don't want traffic shaped or blocked. But if someone is going to get unmetered access to a certain service, I don't really care.
For example, I'm a DirecTV customer on Verizon. I'm aware that if I was a AT&T customer that it would get me unlimited streaming of AT&T's services including DirecTV. That's fine. It makes me jealous as a Verizon customer, but it doesn't impede my ability or AT&T's customers the ability to choose whatever video streaming service they want to use. DirecTV, Netflix, Hulu, Amazon, etc will all still work and will not be throttled.
I've always considered net neutrality to be more considered with how traffic is treated/shaped rather than how it is billed. I don't want service providers to change traffic priority that would benefit one content provider over another. But zero-rating, as far as I can tell, does not change traffic priority or speeds.
Anyone who thinks that Facebook can actually cut down on the fake news posts should take a look at their efforts to stop the clickbait posts. It's gotten worse. Much worse.
Which one is it? Romney predicted Russia would become a problem. Obama responded with a soundbite: The 1980s called and they want their foreign policy back.
In Florida over half the drivers are senior citizens and their motto is "drive slow, sit low". The state flag of Florida should be a steering wheel with a hat and two sets of knuckles on it.
It's doable, but I wouldn't. Electrical grounding issues can blow up your router and anything connected to it. I've seen it happen with distances as small as 30-40ft. I would bury fiber especially since cost doesn't seem to be a huge concern here. If that's not an option then I would just use some point-to-point wireless radios from your house to your office - like Ubiquiti or something similar.
I helped install and configure truck dispatching software in the late 90's / early 00's, and I am honestly surprised that profession still exists today. Lack of technology investment is the only answer I can come up with. There is nothing they did a decade ago that cannot be done by software.
They recommend the best routes for the drivers -> A large truck optimized version of Google maps could do this much better than any human They keep track of fuel costs and other transportation costs to ensure each route is profitable -> Easily done by software They know their driver's habits -> So would tracking software which would be far more objective They look ahead for connecting loads -> Much better done by algorithms They basically work 60-80 hours a week -> Algorithms work 168 hours a week They negotiate load price -> As if Amazon couldn't do this in a more automated fashion. It's certainly in their core competency.
They have a friendly relationship with their drivers -> The one thing software would have trouble with, but virtually all communication could easily be moved to call centers.
I happen to be the IT Director for a transportation company. I can assure you that while they have lagged behind in the past, the industry is rapidly catching up.
Dynamic automated routing has been part of my company since 2005. Routes are selected by fuel contract price, tolls, hours of service, altitude, etc. Fuel and fuel tax tracking has been automated for over a decade Driver habits > Still tends to be manual due to drivers' needs that are constantly changing. Family home time, emergencies, vacations, etc. load planning is pretty much fully optimized except for instances listed above. Some loads can be automatically accepted or denied via EDI, but it depends on capacity and shipper requirements. Our lane prices are set. We rarely negotiate on a load by load basis.
Driver relationships are crucial to keeping good drivers happy. Sure, there are lots of drivers (even in a driver shortage), but there is always a severe lack of *good* drivers. It's the most challenging part of the industry next to regulations. Call centers tend to piss off drivers. Some want to talk to the same dispatchers every day. Some only want to communicate via their mobilecomm device or smartphone app.
Modern transportation software like McLeod LoadMaster or TMW Suite is very advanced.
Slashdot Mirror
There's a problem with that. Education begets better employment
That's always true. It's true sometimes. It's true when the education is needed to fill a void in the current workforce. This is constantly changing.
When Education is sought for something that doesn't get better employment it could possibly hurt the person if they can't afford it. And if this is done in high enough numbers then it could hurt the entire society. In 2013 only 27% of US graduates had job related to their major. That seems like it could be a lot of wasted money, doesn't it?
If there are 3.7M students that graduate every year and the average college cost is $15k/yr (based on public college costs, private is more than double). That's $55.5B/yr. Think of all that student debt that is created that bogs down the economy. Students are essentially graduating with a home mortgage. If they don't get a decent job soon after graduating they can be financially devastated.
Shouldn't you use the hosts file?
I'm pretty sure I read that here.
It would be easier, and probably more secure to block it at the firewall than on individual computers. At least for desktop computers that don't leave the network.
He was in just as much, if not more, non SciFi films. So what's the point of the title?
I want the ability to block the Windows Store from the users. Windows took that ability away from IT in Windows 10 Pro. Thanks, Microsoft.
This isn't a new thing. It's been around for a while.
And it's not just about paying the ransom. The ransom is usually a very small amount of money in the whole scheme of things. It's about being able to conduct business like paying your vendors and employees while your system is down.
Either you don't allow any mobile device on your corporate network, or you set strict mobile management policies that don't allow the installation of *ANY* application by the end user and push all mobile apps through the mobile management platform.
I chose the first option. There's no need for any of our phones or tablets to be on the corporate network.
The UK hasn't left the EU yet. Thus your point is... pointless.
Which then makes the article pointless.
If the demand is there then MS will build there. UK didn't simply close up shop just because they left the EU. Stupid reporting is stupid.
Just curious, but is anyone running SSL decryption on their networks where they could see this traffic leaving the network? Would they be able to see the traffic in plain text to see what is being reported to Microsoft?
Really, Microsoft? You're preaching about IT security when you have completely taken some Windows 10 security decisions *OUT* of the hands of IT departments? We can no longer disable the Windows App Store in Windows 10 Pro, thanks to you. But if we still want that feature we have to update our licenses from Pro to Enterprise.....because SECURITY. Right? It's not about money, right?
Go fuck yourselves.
Alright, if you don't care about billing and only how traffic is treated/shaped, how about you sign up for BiasNetISP. Where the BASIC plan is dirt cheap and affordable to all. But it restricts access to only a handful of websites: Facebook, Foxnews, Google, ESPN360, and the homepage of the church of the latter day saints. It also restricts any other Internet traffic other than web access. Shell out another $20/mo for Netflix traffic on their PREMIUM service. But hey! They pay lip-service to network neutrality and if you pay an extra $10K a year for ULTIMATE service, you get full unrestricted Internet access.
Long story short, traffic is restricted for some of their customers. That IS affecting how traffic is being treated in a very non-neutral "We get to decide where traffic goes" sort of way. Once the gatekeepers try and control what roads you use, they can abuse that power to squeeze money out of you.
You completed turned around my point. I don't want traffic shaped or blocked. But if someone is going to get unmetered access to a certain service, I don't really care.
You're falling for the "zero rating" marketing spin.
Imagine a health insurance plan where everybody pays $50, but fat people have to pay $10 extra.
Reaction: WTF?!!? That's not fair! You can't do that!!!
So they re-imagine the health insurance plan where everybody pays $60, but "health conscious" people can get a $10 discount. :eats more cheetos:
Reaction: That's cool, sure wish I went to the gym more
GP is saying these are the same damn thing, it's just that they have different marketing spins.
You are eating cheetos, saying that the second plan is just fine, because it doesn't affect you.
But their rates didn't change for AT&T and T-moble. So what's the problem?
I recorded some live performances to cassettes with Dolby S before I had the ability to record to hard drive. I was amazed at the difference, and in side-by-side comparisons I liked it better than minidisc. I also used DAT, which was superior to everything.
Alright, if you don't care about billing and only how traffic is treated/shaped, how about you sign up for BiasNetISP. Where the BASIC plan is dirt cheap and affordable to all. But it restricts access to only a handful of websites: Facebook, Foxnews, Google, ESPN360, and the homepage of the church of the latter day saints. It also restricts any other Internet traffic other than web access. Shell out another $20/mo for Netflix traffic on their PREMIUM service. But hey! They pay lip-service to network neutrality and if you pay an extra $10K a year for ULTIMATE service, you get full unrestricted Internet access.
Long story short, traffic is restricted for some of their customers. That IS affecting how traffic is being treated in a very non-neutral "We get to decide where traffic goes" sort of way. Once the gatekeepers try and control what roads you use, they can abuse that power to squeeze money out of you.
You completed turned around my point. I don't want traffic shaped or blocked. But if someone is going to get unmetered access to a certain service, I don't really care.
For example, I'm a DirecTV customer on Verizon. I'm aware that if I was a AT&T customer that it would get me unlimited streaming of AT&T's services including DirecTV. That's fine. It makes me jealous as a Verizon customer, but it doesn't impede my ability or AT&T's customers the ability to choose whatever video streaming service they want to use. DirecTV, Netflix, Hulu, Amazon, etc will all still work and will not be throttled.
Microsoft could outsource this work to the upstanding community at 4chan. They're experts in this stuff. Hell, they'd probably do it for free.
I've always considered net neutrality to be more considered with how traffic is treated/shaped rather than how it is billed. I don't want service providers to change traffic priority that would benefit one content provider over another. But zero-rating, as far as I can tell, does not change traffic priority or speeds.
...to handle the 40+ wireless clients in the house.
Anyone who thinks that Facebook can actually cut down on the fake news posts should take a look at their efforts to stop the clickbait posts. It's gotten worse. Much worse.
They called hspda+ 4G, when it's really 3G+. They are all running LTE now, which is real 4G.
The parent post is referring to the fact that LTE technically isn't 4G. The carriers are bending the truth.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LTE_(telecommunication)
2016: Russia ruined the elections.
Which one is it? Romney predicted Russia would become a problem. Obama responded with a soundbite: The 1980s called and they want their foreign policy back.
Which is it???
In Florida over half the drivers are senior citizens and their motto is "drive slow, sit low". The state flag of Florida should be a steering wheel with a hat and two sets of knuckles on it.
A company who has refused to follow state and city laws for years is ignoring more laws.
All of this data should be archived somewhere else. Only a fool would keep one copy of data and have that one spot a web server.
It's doable, but I wouldn't. Electrical grounding issues can blow up your router and anything connected to it. I've seen it happen with distances as small as 30-40ft. I would bury fiber especially since cost doesn't seem to be a huge concern here. If that's not an option then I would just use some point-to-point wireless radios from your house to your office - like Ubiquiti or something similar.
I have a Priv and it works well for me. But I really miss the BB10 OS on my Z10. It was solid, fast and secure.
I helped install and configure truck dispatching software in the late 90's / early 00's, and I am honestly surprised that profession still exists today. Lack of technology investment is the only answer I can come up with. There is nothing they did a decade ago that cannot be done by software.
They recommend the best routes for the drivers -> A large truck optimized version of Google maps could do this much better than any human
They keep track of fuel costs and other transportation costs to ensure each route is profitable -> Easily done by software
They know their driver's habits -> So would tracking software which would be far more objective
They look ahead for connecting loads -> Much better done by algorithms
They basically work 60-80 hours a week -> Algorithms work 168 hours a week
They negotiate load price -> As if Amazon couldn't do this in a more automated fashion. It's certainly in their core competency.
They have a friendly relationship with their drivers -> The one thing software would have trouble with, but virtually all communication could easily be moved to call centers.
I happen to be the IT Director for a transportation company. I can assure you that while they have lagged behind in the past, the industry is rapidly catching up.
Dynamic automated routing has been part of my company since 2005. Routes are selected by fuel contract price, tolls, hours of service, altitude, etc.
Fuel and fuel tax tracking has been automated for over a decade
Driver habits > Still tends to be manual due to drivers' needs that are constantly changing. Family home time, emergencies, vacations, etc.
load planning is pretty much fully optimized except for instances listed above.
Some loads can be automatically accepted or denied via EDI, but it depends on capacity and shipper requirements.
Our lane prices are set. We rarely negotiate on a load by load basis.
Driver relationships are crucial to keeping good drivers happy. Sure, there are lots of drivers (even in a driver shortage), but there is always a severe lack of *good* drivers. It's the most challenging part of the industry next to regulations. Call centers tend to piss off drivers. Some want to talk to the same dispatchers every day. Some only want to communicate via their mobilecomm device or smartphone app.
Modern transportation software like McLeod LoadMaster or TMW Suite is very advanced.