I'd be willing to bet there are a few less-than-scrupulous companies that sell white box systems with overclocked, cheap processors.
Don't just think it... I'll confirm it for you. It's a multi-million dollar business. Its not box makers, it's chip re-markers. The white box makers are being ripped off right along with the end users. This is a big enough business that the chip remarkers spend $$ 7 figures on capital equipment to rework packages and package markings.
Let me tell you how this works. I've been a hiring manager with H1-B holders on my team.
1. Employer is requred by law to advertise the position, a job already filled by an H1-B holder. These ads are easy to identify, they are very, very specific, and are low-cost small-type ads. They specify US citizenship required. 2. Clueless folks that can't smell these ads send in resumes. 3. Employer is required to document why each and every respondent doesn't qualify. 3a. Some resumes are so far off that an HR drone can check a box and file the resume in a drawer. 3b. Hiring manager (ie, the schmuck knowns as "yours truly") gets to phone interview all the rest. Are you a US citizen? No? Buh-bye. Then a list of very specific questions, all referencing the ad. No recent experience with very specific CAD tool? Buh-bye. Schmuck checks appropriate box, ships stack of paper back to HR. 4. Immigration lawyer completes paperwork.
At my employer, salaries for H1-B were the same as anyone else. Nothing except "what have you done lately?" mattered at salary time. We had a lot of H1-B's, and a lot of open reqs, so no jobs were going to H1-B's that would not have gone to citizens. But of course, times were different then....ie: hot. I'd hate to see the stack of resumes an H1-B ad would pull today.
... and I can't find out because the site is/.'ed:-( is this: Can this technology be used to control (not just increase, but also decrease) depth of field at image processing time? More specifically, can I get selective focus *after* creating the image? In criticizing my own work, I ususally wish I had openned up for *less* depth of field. I realize that sports photographers don't have this problem:-) but some of us nature photographers do.
Did you read the article? You must have this nut case confused with a *rational* UWB proponent. UWB has a place, as I said in my orignal post. But 90% of the UWB supporters I meet are loopy. You obviously understand RF. So do I, after 30 years of experience with it. Why are you letting this article get a free pass? The only way the UWB wackos will get tamed is for people that understand this stuff to point out where UWB *can* work and to put a stop to the outrageous claims that abound.
... that denying Claude Shannon's elegant work advances their case? UWB has a place, a *tiny* place in the future of wireless. But the UWB crack pots want to wipe every radio off the face of the earth and replace it with their wonderiferous new system.
Typical quote from a UWB supporter: "Let's abolish the FCC and let everything go UWB and unlicensed. All that will happen to existing services is the noise floor comes up a little."
So... let's take a technology like instrument landing systems, which by the way, need to work everywhere on planet earth. Let's say in the good ol'US of A we let UWB go ahead in spectrum reserved for ILS. So, when is noise margin the worst for ILS? When you are close to the ground during a rain storm. Gee... that's just when I want ILS to go wonky. Of course, the UWB nuts want every airplane everywhere in the world to upgrade to a UWB version of ILS. Yeah, right. Multiply by 100's of specialized radio services.
The UWB guys are not "enlightened", they are walking, talking, flame-baiting trolls.
Hard disks usually aren't referred to as having tracks Gee... they were 20+ years ago when I was writing drivers for Control Data Cyber systems. I guess I've fallen behind.
it would be extremely dangerous for a program to do something like that Ummm... yes.... did you read the original discussion?
I'll assume you're being serious. I was refering to the fact that other application developers (a.k.a. weasels) might think it useful to write the boot track in instances when they have no business doing so. How might we protect ourselves from these miscreants?
Intresting thought. Pretty valuable in any case, even if complete undo is not reliable. Your comment reminds me that there *is* some tool for Windows that logs reg edits and file actions during install. I don't know if it catches boot track writes or other stuff that might "fly under the radar" so to speak. I saw it 3 or 4 years ago, and unfortunately forget its name.
TurboTax has the Windows(tm) logo flag. So, I take it they pass the "Designed for Windows" logo criteria.
How in heaven's name could anything that writes the boot track earn the Windows logo? This cranky old software validation manager smells either cluelessness (MSFT) or cheating (Intuit) or some combination of the above.
OK, so suppose Intuit gets slapped down. Still doesn't stop other weasels from writing in the boot track. Does this tool exist: 1. before install, make a backup of the boot track and checksum it. 2. after install, checksum the boot track, and display diffs, if any. 3. optional restore of the boot track.
This allows us to get our old boot tracks back, and *still* get the fun of starting a righteous flame-war on SlashDot.
Sorry if the answer to this is "yes, you clueless fool, go use tool __". But at least I'll get educated:-)
Seems to me that some of the comments miss the point. Granted, it is unlikely to be *directly* throttling a spammers server. Granted, what it *is* likely to throttle is some unsuspecting (we hope) person's open relay, and only one connection at a time.
The win comes when tarpits are widely distributed, thus raising the probability than *any* open relay is likely to get throttled as soon as it starts relaying spam. In the limiting case, most/all open relays are effectively useless to spammers. Now the probabilities work in favor of Good Folks (tm) and against spammers. The key to making this work is to have enough tarpits in place to capture all open relays quickly.
Note also, this is very low administration, requires zero active user intervention, and the cost of a false positive is quite low with no end user impact.
He doesn't touch or mention at all 2 very effective reputation management... EBay's seller ratings...
Which EBay was that? How did this get moderated +5 insightful? The moderators have no sense of humor. This is the funniest troll I've read in months. I mean snorting Earl Gray through my nose ROTFL.
EBay deserves a mention, but as a failed and mostly fsck'd way to do reputation management. I trust EBay seller's ratings about as far as I can toss a Buick underhand with my lame arm.
I agree that that is the way it works at some places, and this result would not surprise me. OTOH where I worked, the validation manager (me) was on equal footing with the development managers, and I could yank their chain for stupidity. A bug that said essentially "this may be working as designed, but the design is fsck'ed" went into the system and got addressed. Calling these reports a "bug" report sets up the wrong frame of mind, in a way. Better to call them "problem" reports or "issue" reports. That way, the "that's the way it's designed" argument loses steam, since some customer can still have a "problem" or "issue" with it, even if it was designed to work that way.
here that said something like "TurboTax writes to boot sector"
In a past life, I managed a software product validation team. Nothing would have shipped past me with this in it. It's a bug. File a report. You do not need to be a registered user to file a bug report, it turns out.
I've had it with hard-to-configure systems. Light weight laptops are most guilty. Trying to find the combination of USB floppy and printer port CD-rom or whatever that will actually let you install something on one of these spawn-of-satan systems is hugely annoying. Life is too short.
The last time I received a Dell system, the system drive was stupidly partitioned... a tiny logical C: drive, and a huge logical D: drive. Dell: clue up!!!! Windows software wants to install into C:Program Files, OK? The system was an expensive paperweight until I repartitition.
Dell are idiots. Moneymaking idiots, but idiots none the less. They don't get my money.
They refused to let customers have the DSL modem password, so that they wouldn't screw it up. While waiting on hold for oh, about 3 hours, to get a tech to fix one of their screw ups, I downloaded the manual. I figured out how to fix the problem, and then, just for grins, tried the factory password. It worked. I fixed the problem. About that time the tech answered. I told him how I fixed the problem. He asked me not to change the password, as it was their policy to leave them *all* at the factory default so that they could easily acess them. They had actually thought about the problem, and made an active management decision to require fsck'ed up security. Sheesh.
I hate to be pedantic, but as a life-long Norsky-watcher I feel I must correct your misaprehension of Norsky -- a Norsky would not say "thees", he'd say "tis" with a very hard "t" and short "i" -- a Minnesota native from Daloot or da range would more likely say "dis".
And if you don't believe me, I'll introduce you to my mother-in-law, for whom "Ja" is a four sylable word with a two octave range, and who did not understand any of the dialect jokes in "Fargo", because that *is* the way she talks.
From what I have seen the only difference that a women sees between a creep and just some guy hitting on her is weather or not she is interested in the guy.
Ummm.... in some cases true, but an oversimplistic and overgeneralized statement. It only takes 1 in 100 to be a mental case to nearly guarantee a truly creepy situation for any woman CS student in some point in her metriculation. You're a guy, do the math.
Not only remember it, I knew the author. He also hung out at an Apple store in Des Moines, IA. Can't remember his name, prolific coder, though. Before Eamon he did a Star Wars game that was pretty cool for the time. That game was stand alone, Eamon had an adventure engine under it. We did a lot of "stupid Apple II" tricks in those days. (Not II+, I had integer Basic on the mobo. A move up from my SWTP 6800 system, remember those? Man, how I wished I could afford an ASR 33.)
And who are you? Written a lot of music have you? Done *anything* positive in your teen years that caused a nation to sit up and take notice of you, even for a few minutes? Your contribution to the arts and humanities is what, exactly? Great artist that you have never heard about are all around you, if you care to look. But, of course, you might have to train your ears and eyes.
one of the interesting things about food photography laws is that it has to be a photo of edible food... but not necessarily the food being advertised. in the old days of very hot studio lighting, using mashed potatoes in an ice cream cone to simulate ice cream was a standard trick. back when my wife worked in marketing at a large food company (think Betty...) she watched a photog's assistant spend two hours using tweezers to pull perfect crumbs off a slice of cake and glue them back in just so with sugar water.
i once saw a book that i wish i had bought... a couple of food photog's that had done 1 too many cookbooks went on a self-assigned lark and did the most exquisite, beautiful, delicious looking photos of disgusting things... like whole mice on skewers, beautifully browned, glazed with a refined apricot sauce and laying on a bed of arugula and garnished with colorful grilled squash... it was a real hoot. to bad i never bought one nor can i remember the authors.
Slashdot Mirror
I'd be willing to bet there are a few less-than-scrupulous companies that sell white box systems with overclocked, cheap processors.
Don't just think it... I'll confirm it for you. It's a multi-million dollar business. Its not box makers, it's chip re-markers. The white box makers are being ripped off right along with the end users. This is a big enough business that the chip remarkers spend $$ 7 figures on capital equipment to rework packages and package markings.
1. Employer is requred by law to advertise the position, a job already filled by an H1-B holder. These ads are easy to identify, they are very, very specific, and are low-cost small-type ads. They specify US citizenship required.
2. Clueless folks that can't smell these ads send in resumes.
3. Employer is required to document why each and every respondent doesn't qualify.
3a. Some resumes are so far off that an HR drone can check a box and file the resume in a drawer.
3b. Hiring manager (ie, the schmuck knowns as "yours truly") gets to phone interview all the rest. Are you a US citizen? No? Buh-bye. Then a list of very specific questions, all referencing the ad. No recent experience with very specific CAD tool? Buh-bye. Schmuck checks appropriate box, ships stack of paper back to HR.
4. Immigration lawyer completes paperwork.
At my employer, salaries for H1-B were the same as anyone else. Nothing except "what have you done lately?" mattered at salary time. We had a lot of H1-B's, and a lot of open reqs, so no jobs were going to H1-B's that would not have gone to citizens. But of course, times were different then....ie: hot. I'd hate to see the stack of resumes an H1-B ad would pull today.
... and I can't find out because the site is /.'ed :-( :-) but some of us nature photographers do.
is this: Can this technology be used to control (not just increase, but also decrease) depth of field at image processing time? More specifically, can I get selective focus *after* creating the image? In criticizing my own work, I ususally wish I had openned up for *less* depth of field. I realize that sports photographers don't have this problem
Did you read the article? You must have this nut case confused with a *rational* UWB proponent. UWB has a place, as I said in my orignal post. But 90% of the UWB supporters I meet are loopy. You obviously understand RF. So do I, after 30 years of experience with it. Why are you letting this article get a free pass? The only way the UWB wackos will get tamed is for people that understand this stuff to point out where UWB *can* work and to put a stop to the outrageous claims that abound.
Typical quote from a UWB supporter: "Let's abolish the FCC and let everything go UWB and unlicensed. All that will happen to existing services is the noise floor comes up a little."
So... let's take a technology like instrument landing systems, which by the way, need to work everywhere on planet earth. Let's say in the good ol'US of A we let UWB go ahead in spectrum reserved for ILS. So, when is noise margin the worst for ILS? When you are close to the ground during a rain storm. Gee... that's just when I want ILS to go wonky. Of course, the UWB nuts want every airplane everywhere in the world to upgrade to a UWB version of ILS. Yeah, right. Multiply by 100's of specialized radio services.
The UWB guys are not "enlightened", they are walking, talking, flame-baiting trolls.
Gee... they were 20+ years ago when I was writing drivers for Control Data Cyber systems. I guess I've fallen behind.
it would be extremely dangerous for a program to do something like that
Ummm... yes.... did you read the original discussion?
Thank you for playing.
I'll assume you're being serious.
I was refering to the fact that other application developers (a.k.a. weasels) might think it useful to write the boot track in instances when they have no business doing so. How might we protect ourselves from these miscreants?
Intresting thought. Pretty valuable in any case, even if complete undo is not reliable. Your comment reminds me that there *is* some tool for Windows that logs reg edits and file actions during install. I don't know if it catches boot track writes or other stuff that might "fly under the radar" so to speak. I saw it 3 or 4 years ago, and unfortunately forget its name.
TurboTax has the Windows(tm) logo flag. So, I take it they pass the "Designed for Windows" logo criteria.
How in heaven's name could anything that writes the boot track earn the Windows logo? This cranky old software validation manager smells either cluelessness (MSFT) or cheating (Intuit) or some combination of the above.
OK, so suppose Intuit gets slapped down. Still doesn't stop other weasels from writing in the boot track. Does this tool exist:
:-)
1. before install, make a backup of the boot track and checksum it.
2. after install, checksum the boot track, and display diffs, if any.
3. optional restore of the boot track.
This allows us to get our old boot tracks back, and *still* get the fun of starting a righteous flame-war on SlashDot.
Sorry if the answer to this is "yes, you clueless fool, go use tool __". But at least I'll get educated
Great idea! And cheap, too! Should only take 4 or 5 guys a couple of weeks.
Granted, it is unlikely to be *directly* throttling a spammers server.
Granted, what it *is* likely to throttle is some unsuspecting (we hope) person's open relay, and only one connection at a time.
The win comes when tarpits are widely distributed, thus raising the probability than *any* open relay is likely to get throttled as soon as it starts relaying spam. In the limiting case, most/all open relays are effectively useless to spammers. Now the probabilities work in favor of Good Folks (tm) and against spammers. The key to making this work is to have enough tarpits in place to capture all open relays quickly.
Note also, this is very low administration, requires zero active user intervention, and the cost of a false positive is quite low with no end user impact.
He doesn't touch or mention at all 2 very effective reputation management ... EBay's seller ratings...
Which EBay was that? How did this get moderated +5 insightful? The moderators have no sense of humor. This is the funniest troll I've read in months. I mean snorting Earl Gray through my nose ROTFL.
EBay deserves a mention, but as a failed and mostly fsck'd way to do reputation management. I trust EBay seller's ratings about as far as I can toss a Buick underhand with my lame arm.
I agree that that is the way it works at some places, and this result would not surprise me. OTOH where I worked, the validation manager (me) was on equal footing with the development managers, and I could yank their chain for stupidity. A bug that said essentially "this may be working as designed, but the design is fsck'ed" went into the system and got addressed.
Calling these reports a "bug" report sets up the wrong frame of mind, in a way. Better to call them "problem" reports or "issue" reports. That way, the "that's the way it's designed" argument loses steam, since some customer can still have a "problem" or "issue" with it, even if it was designed to work that way.
that said something like "TurboTax writes to boot sector"
In a past life, I managed a software product validation team. Nothing would have shipped past me with this in it. It's a bug. File a report. You do not need to be a registered user to file a bug report, it turns out.
The last time I received a Dell system, the system drive was stupidly partitioned... a tiny logical C: drive, and a huge logical D: drive. Dell: clue up!!!! Windows software wants to install into C:Program Files, OK? The system was an expensive paperweight until I repartitition.
Dell are idiots. Moneymaking idiots, but idiots none the less. They don't get my money.
They refused to let customers have the DSL modem password, so that they wouldn't screw it up. While waiting on hold for oh, about 3 hours, to get a tech to fix one of their screw ups, I downloaded the manual. I figured out how to fix the problem, and then, just for grins, tried the factory password. It worked. I fixed the problem. About that time the tech answered. I told him how I fixed the problem. He asked me not to change the password, as it was their policy to leave them *all* at the factory default so that they could easily acess them. They had actually thought about the problem, and made an active management decision to require fsck'ed up security. Sheesh.
And if you don't believe me, I'll introduce you to my mother-in-law, for whom "Ja" is a four sylable word with a two octave range, and who did not understand any of the dialect jokes in "Fargo", because that *is* the way she talks.
Stupidly wide. I have 3 towers side by side under my table right now. Side warts kills that. Side cables kill it worse.
Noise?? I didn't see where they mentioned fan noise. The next time I buy a case, it will be the most quiet one I can find.
Bzzzt! Thank you for playing.
From what I have seen the only difference that a women sees between a creep and just some guy hitting on her is weather or not she is interested in the guy.
Ummm.... in some cases true, but an oversimplistic and overgeneralized statement. It only takes 1 in 100 to be a mental case to nearly guarantee a truly creepy situation for any woman CS student in some point in her metriculation. You're a guy, do the math.
Not only remember it, I knew the author. He also hung out at an Apple store in Des Moines, IA. Can't remember his name, prolific coder, though. Before Eamon he did a Star Wars game that was pretty cool for the time. That game was stand alone, Eamon had an adventure engine under it. We did a lot of "stupid Apple II" tricks in those days. (Not II+, I had integer Basic on the mobo. A move up from my SWTP 6800 system, remember those? Man, how I wished I could afford an ASR 33.)
under educated secretary in personnel: "My computer was acting strange. So I just re-installed everything."
MSCE certified server admin: "My computer was acting strange. So I just re-installed everything."
Yup, your right.
you forgot:
-1, analytically correct but ideologically incorrect
-1, rational adult
And who are you? Written a lot of music have you? Done *anything* positive in your teen years that caused a nation to sit up and take notice of you, even for a few minutes? Your contribution to the arts and humanities is what, exactly? Great artist that you have never heard about are all around you, if you care to look. But, of course, you might have to train your ears and eyes.
one of the interesting things about food photography laws is that it has to be a photo of edible food... but not necessarily the food being advertised. in the old days of very hot studio lighting, using mashed potatoes in an ice cream cone to simulate ice cream was a standard trick. back when my wife worked in marketing at a large food company (think Betty...) she watched a photog's assistant spend two hours using tweezers to pull perfect crumbs off a slice of cake and glue them back in just so with sugar water.
i once saw a book that i wish i had bought... a couple of food photog's that had done 1 too many cookbooks went on a self-assigned lark and did the most exquisite, beautiful, delicious looking photos of disgusting things... like whole mice on skewers, beautifully browned, glazed with a refined apricot sauce and laying on a bed of arugula and garnished with colorful grilled squash... it was a real hoot. to bad i never bought one nor can i remember the authors.