That would be great, if there were any alternatives to Citibank that didn't outsource.
Outsourcing isn't the problem. Lack of security is the problem.
But is doesn't even matter if the next bank you move to is significantly better. If each instance of a security screw up caused a bank's income to collapse, it would soon be the case that there would be banks paying attention to security, becuase the first to do so would get a sudden increase in business, and the rest could not afford not to follow.
Is it fair for the cities to decide that it should be free and drive them out of business?
If the citizens of some city decide to do that, why not? Provision of state funded schools no doubt put a lot of private tutoring operations out of business.
More to the point, why should the state legislature be allowed to prevent the citizens of some locality deciding that WiFi is more like roads than cable TV, and so they want their local taxes to pay for providing that infrastructure?
The big problem is that stupid customers are everywhere.
Assume for the moment that this is confirmed to be Citibank. Now, count the number of people with citibank two weeks from now. That is a measure of the prevelance of stupid customers.
If the bank knew that they would lose most of their customers the first time this kind of thing happened they would get much more secure very fast.
As it is they work on the theory that most of their customers are willing to have their money hanging out the window for the first sub-minimum wage employee to walk off with, if the alternative is 10 minutes on the phone moving to another bank.
Considering his other comments, I'm guessing Microsoft.
Well, that would make sense. I could well imagine that M$ software is the result of hiring programmers on the basis of their blog content and Usenet postings rather than, say, programming ability and experience.
We always 'google' our perspective new-hires. People have been not hired because of the content discovered.
Like use of handwriting recognition, this looks to be a good feature a prosepctive employee can use to determine that the company they are talking to are a load of B-arkers.
Some of us have laptops without wireless Internet, and even computers without network cards at all.
Only on/. would you find people who get into the habit of thinking that internet access requires a network card.:-)
I wouldn't think there are many people for which the price of a wikipedia DVD would be noticably less than the price of the phone calls to look things up in a given year.
I think the best argument for producing a DVD is that it would give people a nice way to contribute to the wikipedia foundation. I think I would buy one for the same reason my company has a subscription to get every FreeBSD release on CD, even though we use hardly any of them. Getting so,mething which might be useful/interesting in exchange for a donation feels good.
I cannot, for the life of me, see the point in buying a 19 inch LCD monitor to run at 1280x1024 (not even mentioning the odd aspect ratio) when I can buy a 17 inch LCD to do the same.
I'm replacing a 1200x1024 19" CRT with two cheap 1200x1024 19" TFTs. I've worked on 17" TFTs of the same resolution and decided tha I preferred the 19".
With antialiasing etc. in modern display subsystems, you can get perfectly nice text with fewer pixels than you once would. That could let you draw smaller (and hence more) text on a 17" display, but that may shrink the physical size of the text below what you'd like, especially if you are getting older (sigh!) and are looking at it all day.
Blow the screen up to 19" and for the same pixels/char you get bigger characters.
So, if your main need is basicly lots of windows full of text side by side (programming for instance), a 19" may make sense. I also like a display which takes up a good proportion of my field of view. All very personal, like picking a chair.
BTW, if anyone is interested, I looked around and the best bang-per-buck I could find was the AGNEOVO F419. I have one as a second display on my games machine and it's really quite nice for the price for text based work. Really bad blurr in Doom3, but I expected that and only tried it for a laugh. (just under 200 quid/$375, and anyone pointing out a better UK price will be strangled:-)).
The fact is this bullshit costs people money, lots of time and resources, and the occasional customer.
customer
Hey, I didn't get that important anouncement.
itguy
You're letting someone you don't know pre-screen all your mail, and are suprised you miss some messages?
customer
Er, when you put it like that...
However, unix started out as quite a nice design, and has had ugly cruft glued on top until it is now a horrer from the pit.
The STS started out as a horrer from the pit, and then has had decades of getting older and uglier.
It's no use guys, this is never going to get off the ground.
Hey! Why don't we strap a couple of fireworks on the side! At least that way we can get a launch and when it all goes bang someone will fund a replacement which actually work! Won't they?
What they are not fine with is people using the free version they give out to create a competitor that could help put them out of buisiness.
But that is, of course, not what seems to have happened. What happened, accordingto the write up, is that someone who had at some point been been payed some moeny by OSDN was, completely unrelatedly, working on a possibly competitive product. No one is claiming this contractor was using BK in his work on that product.
basicly BM's interpretation of the licence is that no one who has any connection, however tenuous, with an organisation using the free BK can work on a version control system. This looks to me to be a clause specifically created to be impossible for the licencee to police, and so to provide a way for BM to remove the licence on a whim.
And what is BitMover so upset about? That anyone would dare compete with them?
What makes you think they are upset?
They made a marketing move, they have reaped the benefit, now they have found a way out taking the benefits with them.
I wonder how long they were playing Six Degrees Of Separation from OSDN before they found the contractor who had doen some work on a rival product, giving them the excuse to throw a hissy fit and stomp out.
I would have hoped that the kernel developers were bright enough to have had a migration-out plan in place from the moment they decided to move to BK.
Transformers was crap too, but it wasn't an example of competition to avoid plot.
OTOH, Wacky Races was an example of a competition and no plot, but wasn't crap because they used the framework as a basis for a stream of gags, so there was entertainment.
BTW, you must be young if you think Transoformers counts as a long time ago:-). They were selling me Thunderbirds merchandise the first time around.
When you have a *SHITLOAD* of data, both being created and being retained, things start to change significantly.
But when you have a shitload of data being created, you are clearly a big operation with a shitload of resources.
Aren't we talking about the same volume of data per day as would be added to the backups? Tapping that off into an archive isn't going to involve a volume of data which isn't already being handled. So it comes down to cost of the actual archive storage, which is going to be cheaper in proportion as the organisation gets larger.
Moving 600 terebytes of data around all of the time becomes impractial at today's data rates.
Well, as the doctor in the joke says, don't do that then. The issue was retention, not copying everything across your network every night. Leave it where it is. Don't even need to back it up, if it gets eliminated by a disk crash after 5 years, ho-hum, no one gets put in jail when their paper records are destroyed by fire, unless they are holding the match.
In any case, by definition you are already shipping all this stuff around. Email which doesn't get sent to anyone and reports which don't get transfered to anyone other than the author to be read are not very useful.
If you read what I wrote, rather than what you would like to read to have a straw man to shoot at, you'll se I said nothing like that.
What I said was, in paraphrase ``only the guilty are subject to a significant cost in keeping everything''. Nothing about hiding anything. There are indeed perfectly good reasons for hiding things, consider the story last week about the anarchist site whose brain-dead admin had his logs confiscated when half a brain cell would have told him not to log his users' IPs in the first place.
But there is no reason for a business not to archive it's electronic paperwork, and lots of sound business reasons to do so. Having this enforced by the state is, as you say, a different issue, but I was just aswering the ``would we want to live in a world where...'' point.
Would we want to live in a world where the state had laws against us sticking our fingers in live electricity outlets? Well, there is a level of insult to our intelligence in such laws, but on the whole their are much more worrying things the state will do while we worry about fighting such trivia.
In the UK, the double jepardy law ceased to exist today.
Slashdot Mirror
Indeed, you'd think she was playing a shop assistant with limited education who lives on a council estate... oh, wait, er, ...
And why didn't that idiot Cleese just say `this parrot is dead' and walk out of the shop?
I don't think Lawrence Olivier could have pulled that line off and made it sound credible, much less funny.
Yet somehow Simon Jones manages it. Perhaps because he's a better comic actor than Olivier.
The HHGG isn't a book they are turning into a movie, it is a radio show they are turning into a movie. The line works fine when delivered properly.
Outsourcing isn't the problem. Lack of security is the problem.
But is doesn't even matter if the next bank you move to is significantly better. If each instance of a security screw up caused a bank's income to collapse, it would soon be the case that there would be banks paying attention to security, becuase the first to do so would get a sudden increase in business, and the rest could not afford not to follow.
Well, it's nice that the rest of us can freeload on this pr0n network to do other things then isn't it.
If the citizens of some city decide to do that, why not? Provision of state funded schools no doubt put a lot of private tutoring operations out of business.
More to the point, why should the state legislature be allowed to prevent the citizens of some locality deciding that WiFi is more like roads than cable TV, and so they want their local taxes to pay for providing that infrastructure?
Do you object to paying for the road he has to travel down to buy pr0n from a shop?
The big problem is that stupid customers are everywhere.
Assume for the moment that this is confirmed to be Citibank. Now, count the number of people with citibank two weeks from now. That is a measure of the prevelance of stupid customers.
If the bank knew that they would lose most of their customers the first time this kind of thing happened they would get much more secure very fast.
As it is they work on the theory that most of their customers are willing to have their money hanging out the window for the first sub-minimum wage employee to walk off with, if the alternative is 10 minutes on the phone moving to another bank.
Well, that would make sense. I could well imagine that M$ software is the result of hiring programmers on the basis of their blog content and Usenet postings rather than, say, programming ability and experience.
Like use of handwriting recognition, this looks to be a good feature a prosepctive employee can use to determine that the company they are talking to are a load of B-arkers.
Only on /. would you find people who get into the habit of thinking that internet access requires a network card.:-)
I wouldn't think there are many people for which the price of a wikipedia DVD would be noticably less than the price of the phone calls to look things up in a given year.
I think the best argument for producing a DVD is that it would give people a nice way to contribute to the wikipedia foundation. I think I would buy one for the same reason my company has a subscription to get every FreeBSD release on CD, even though we use hardly any of them. Getting so,mething which might be useful/interesting in exchange for a donation feels good.
I'm replacing a 1200x1024 19" CRT with two cheap 1200x1024 19" TFTs. I've worked on 17" TFTs of the same resolution and decided tha I preferred the 19".
With antialiasing etc. in modern display subsystems, you can get perfectly nice text with fewer pixels than you once would. That could let you draw smaller (and hence more) text on a 17" display, but that may shrink the physical size of the text below what you'd like, especially if you are getting older (sigh!) and are looking at it all day.
Blow the screen up to 19" and for the same pixels/char you get bigger characters.
So, if your main need is basicly lots of windows full of text side by side (programming for instance), a 19" may make sense. I also like a display which takes up a good proportion of my field of view. All very personal, like picking a chair.
BTW, if anyone is interested, I looked around and the best bang-per-buck I could find was the AGNEOVO F419. I have one as a second display on my games machine and it's really quite nice for the price for text based work. Really bad blurr in Doom3, but I expected that and only tried it for a laugh. (just under 200 quid/$375, and anyone pointing out a better UK price will be strangled:-)).
Why on earth are you taking a sociology course?
We're lucky NASA didn't use protomatter.
Then it's your fault for being dim enough to run your technical support address through an RBL.
Technical support people are payed to deal with users. Compared to that pain, ignoring a bit of spam is light relief.
However, unix started out as quite a nice design, and has had ugly cruft glued on top until it is now a horrer from the pit.
The STS started out as a horrer from the pit, and then has had decades of getting older and uglier.
But that is, of course, not what seems to have happened. What happened, accordingto the write up, is that someone who had at some point been been payed some moeny by OSDN was, completely unrelatedly, working on a possibly competitive product. No one is claiming this contractor was using BK in his work on that product.
basicly BM's interpretation of the licence is that no one who has any connection, however tenuous, with an organisation using the free BK can work on a version control system. This looks to me to be a clause specifically created to be impossible for the licencee to police, and so to provide a way for BM to remove the licence on a whim.
What makes you think they are upset?
They made a marketing move, they have reaped the benefit, now they have found a way out taking the benefits with them.
I wonder how long they were playing Six Degrees Of Separation from OSDN before they found the contractor who had doen some work on a rival product, giving them the excuse to throw a hissy fit and stomp out.
I would have hoped that the kernel developers were bright enough to have had a migration-out plan in place from the moment they decided to move to BK.
The best place to be when one of Lucas's abortions is released is in a cinema showing something else.
Transformers was crap too, but it wasn't an example of competition to avoid plot.
OTOH, Wacky Races was an example of a competition and no plot, but wasn't crap because they used the framework as a basis for a stream of gags, so there was entertainment.
BTW, you must be young if you think Transoformers counts as a long time ago:-). They were selling me Thunderbirds merchandise the first time around.
But when you have a shitload of data being created, you are clearly a big operation with a shitload of resources.
Aren't we talking about the same volume of data per day as would be added to the backups? Tapping that off into an archive isn't going to involve a volume of data which isn't already being handled. So it comes down to cost of the actual archive storage, which is going to be cheaper in proportion as the organisation gets larger.
Well, as the doctor in the joke says, don't do that then. The issue was retention, not copying everything across your network every night. Leave it where it is. Don't even need to back it up, if it gets eliminated by a disk crash after 5 years, ho-hum, no one gets put in jail when their paper records are destroyed by fire, unless they are holding the match.
In any case, by definition you are already shipping all this stuff around. Email which doesn't get sent to anyone and reports which don't get transfered to anyone other than the author to be read are not very useful.
If you read what I wrote, rather than what you would like to read to have a straw man to shoot at, you'll se I said nothing like that.
What I said was, in paraphrase ``only the guilty are subject to a significant cost in keeping everything''. Nothing about hiding anything. There are indeed perfectly good reasons for hiding things, consider the story last week about the anarchist site whose brain-dead admin had his logs confiscated when half a brain cell would have told him not to log his users' IPs in the first place.
But there is no reason for a business not to archive it's electronic paperwork, and lots of sound business reasons to do so. Having this enforced by the state is, as you say, a different issue, but I was just aswering the ``would we want to live in a world where...'' point.
Would we want to live in a world where the state had laws against us sticking our fingers in live electricity outlets? Well, there is a level of insult to our intelligence in such laws, but on the whole their are much more worrying things the state will do while we worry about fighting such trivia.
In the UK, the double jepardy law ceased to exist today.