I got a raise a month ago for the first time in two years since I started this Security job and not a token raise either. There is demand there for Security officers from Security Admin jobs to Pen testing jobs and everything inbetween
Its usually a good indication that they are ignored or virtually ignored. Perhaps they are read but they would be discarded as quickly as they are read, without any further discussion, comment or "nod of the head" as W B Yeats would say.
The arguments are bullshit I'm afraid. He paid his taxes for the county. Why did the county not have a fire department, or an agreement with the fire department of a city? Do you specifically pay a Fire Department Tax? If not then you can't say that he didn't pay the tax, because he did, same as you did, except someone said lets hold people after this line to ransom. We wont help you unless you pay us. The fact they arrived at the scene, with the Firetruck and saved a neighbors house is proof that the idea of "the cost of getting the firefighters out there needs to be covered", it already was.
Once again Americans seem to have the wrong priorities. In Europe, we send our Firefighters where they're needed. It makes no sense to argue about cost when there are lives at stake. Regardless of national borders, county borders or city borders. If this happened in any country in the EU there would be uproar, not the murmurings of discontent from some people and stead fast adherence to a policy of economic ransom of others, while the majority seem content that it doesn't effect them... for the moment
I see what your saying, but I think that perhaps the Jedi were blinded by their own sense of self importance. I think they were ignorant to more than just the danger looming around them. I think they didn't make all of that obvious enough or in depth enough, but its another shortcoming of a story of that magnitude in such a short period of time. All of that said, I think this provides an appropriate context to so many Jedi being caught out in such a bad way considering other Jedi's in the history of Star Wars.
That he was vulnerable to fear, sure. That he was turned to the darkside, sure. That he defended palpatine from execution sure -- but he was arguing even then that palpatine should stand trial, that killing him was not the jedi way... etc. He's pretty conflicted - he's trying to do good, but of course he wanted palpatine to live because he thought palpatine could save the girl - so he didn't want to let him die. So sure that's beleiveable, that he intervened to save him, there's some real conflict going on.
That he VERY shortly thereafter kills a classroom full of kids.. give me a break. There was no threat from them yet, no real conflict with them at all, and he wasn't anywhere near the level of cartoon evil yet, that he'd kill a bunch of kids, nevermind kids he actually knew.
I grant you that, the whole killing of the children scene was stupid and was purely designed to show how dark he now was. But the scene where he saved Palpatine I believe he thought he saw what he perceived to be the hypocrisy of the Jedi by trying to kill Palpatine. Then once he made his choice he began to feel the guilt of what he did. Again, probably should have been done in a far more drawn out fashion but in the absence of a TV series to show a longer transition, we got the "wont someone please think of the children" scene.
A few stormtroopers? We're not talking about a handful here, we're talking about being outnumbered by huge amounts. Also never underestimate the element of surprise, that usually makes up for being outnumbered so imagine what it's like when you're outnumbered to begin with.
The turning to the darkside was set in motion from the second one. Sure it was accelerated somewhat during the latter portions of the third one, but thats what you get from showing it in a film. Lets not forget what Yoda said "Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate". It was his fear which led him down the wrong path. The fear of being taken for granted, the fear of being an outcast, the fear of losing his one true love. Fear is a powerful emotion, which has corrupted bigger men in history than some fictional character in a Sci Fi fantasy film.
I know I'm going to be lambasted for this and let me say right from the start I don't like the majority of Star Wars, but I really liked Episode 3.
To me it was one of the few ones who's plot was reasonably believable. Reasonably good build up, some tension thrown in, no overwhelmingly painful, tediously dragged out love story, good depiction of a coup and to top it off, only a few unanswered questions about what had taken place.
Star Trek story lines usually had an air of believability to them. Granted some series had too many encounters with time travel (I'm looking at you Voyager), holodeck accidents (I'm looking at you TNG) and the Mirror Universe (I'm looking at you DS9), but you could usually find decent explanations for most things. To be honest I like the TV series approach better than the films, as was stated by others here, you have more time to develop characters, more time to develop lore and culture but you also invariably have more time to create garbage and bullshit. But overall I feel that the genius to bullshit ratio of Star Trek far exceeds that of Star Wars
Just because an IT department is strict does not mean the IT guys themselves are. Many feel they are above the law.
You're right, which is why its usually a good idea to isolate your IT Security team from the IT department at large. Don't give them access to implement policy, just make it and monitor for abuses.
I meant played the single player through. I played it for about 5 - 10 minutes when the game first came out, mainly to ensure I knew the controls before playing online, but quickly realised how bad the AI is compared to human counterparts
Who honestly plays the single player version of L4D or L4D2?
The entire game is based around the idea of other humans playing with you, not some bot. I don't have any statistics to back this up, but I would be very surprised if there were anywhere near the number of people playing single player that would qualify the statement of it having "strong single player". In fact I'd say its probably got one of the weakest single player modes of any single player games out there. Neither I, nor any of my friends have played the single player and infact we've had conversations about the futility of even providing a single player version of the game.
This all depends on your definition on what a realistic shooter actually is. Are you talking about Modern Warfare? Bad Company? Left 4 Dead?
These are arcade style FPS. Now a game like Arma 2 is what I would consider a realistic shooter.
When you reload, its based on clips rather than ammo count. Weapons behave and look like their real world counter part and sound effects are accurate. You mainly hear the sound of the bullets breaking the sound barrier.
That is a feature of this game. I read it on an IGN article recently (there was also video footage of this in a demo). I'll find the article once I'm at home, IGN is blocked in work.
What insurance is good for is one thing and one thing only: To handle things between minor fender benders up to totaling a car and/or covering relatively minor injuries to others or major ones to yourself.
And tell me this which is the overwhelming kind of automobile accident? If you suddenly had to pay massive costs to cover the damage that you did to someone else's car in a relatively minor accident, could you afford it? Could the average Joe?
Not to mention the fact that that in a system where by the law requires you to have insurance every one is ensured to have financial costs covered in the event of an accident which isn't their fault.
Now if you have a complaint about how the insurance companies handle themselves in claims or how much they charge, I have no qualms with you, but mandatory insurance is a sensible solution.
Stop that! It's SILLY. Very SILLY indeed! Started off as a nice little idea about the people responsible being fired but now it's just got SILLY! The post is far too short, too, and you can tell those are not proper statements! CLEAR OUT, THE LOT OF YOU!
Well considering the only people who identify themselves as 'Americans' (Pronounced: A-mur-i-cans) are United States citizens, I'm going to take a wild guess that he's talking about United States citizens.
I can tell that you previously worked in IT Security because you're the only one who actually considered things beyond your immediate point of view.
First off, to all of you who claim I am on a power trip, this is simply not the case. I don't want to do this job. I, in fact, hate this aspect of my job. I do it because it is my job and because I understand the risks the company is exposed to which most people are ignorant to. I'm an IT security professional, not some egocentric maniac. I don't abuse my position, I don't bypass the content blocking. I do my job and I do it professionally.
Second, I'm not saying that we have a zero tolerance to anything non-work related, but what I do say is that where the companies interests are threatened, we do actively block the content and if someone does circumnavigate the block, we monitor usage to ensure that they're not.
Third, in relation to webmail, we block this not to stop you emailing your friends, we do this to ensure that our data STAYS on our network within our control. We want to ensure that your not stealing large quantities of data or leaking it accidentally by sending it unencrypted across non secure channels. Our internal email solution provides this security. You can bring in your USB drives all you want but our USB restricted thin clients prevent you from uploading/downloading anything to/or from the network for the same reasons.
What many people in these comments fail to realise is that there are reasons for security policies beyond what you initially think is the reason for it.
Yes I can see how these measures may appear (and in some cases actually be draconian) but there are solid reasons behind them and perhaps you wouldn't abuse your webmail access, or your USB access or any of the other form of access that we have restricted, there are people who would. The threat of Employee Fraud is massive. IT Security needs to be keenly aware of this and needs to take steps to prevent it.
Slashdot Mirror
I got a raise a month ago for the first time in two years since I started this Security job and not a token raise either. There is demand there for Security officers from Security Admin jobs to Pen testing jobs and everything inbetween
Its usually a good indication that they are ignored or virtually ignored. Perhaps they are read but they would be discarded as quickly as they are read, without any further discussion, comment or "nod of the head" as W B Yeats would say.
As this comment will probably be.
The arguments are bullshit I'm afraid. He paid his taxes for the county. Why did the county not have a fire department, or an agreement with the fire department of a city? Do you specifically pay a Fire Department Tax? If not then you can't say that he didn't pay the tax, because he did, same as you did, except someone said lets hold people after this line to ransom. We wont help you unless you pay us. The fact they arrived at the scene, with the Firetruck and saved a neighbors house is proof that the idea of "the cost of getting the firefighters out there needs to be covered", it already was.
Once again Americans seem to have the wrong priorities. In Europe, we send our Firefighters where they're needed. It makes no sense to argue about cost when there are lives at stake. Regardless of national borders, county borders or city borders. If this happened in any country in the EU there would be uproar, not the murmurings of discontent from some people and stead fast adherence to a policy of economic ransom of others, while the majority seem content that it doesn't effect them... for the moment
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
That he was vulnerable to fear, sure. That he was turned to the darkside, sure. That he defended palpatine from execution sure -- but he was arguing even then that palpatine should stand trial, that killing him was not the jedi way... etc. He's pretty conflicted - he's trying to do good, but of course he wanted palpatine to live because he thought palpatine could save the girl - so he didn't want to let him die. So sure that's beleiveable, that he intervened to save him, there's some real conflict going on.
That he VERY shortly thereafter kills a classroom full of kids .. give me a break. There was no threat from them yet, no real conflict with them at all, and he wasn't anywhere near the level of cartoon evil yet, that he'd kill a bunch of kids, nevermind kids he actually knew.
I grant you that, the whole killing of the children scene was stupid and was purely designed to show how dark he now was. But the scene where he saved Palpatine I believe he thought he saw what he perceived to be the hypocrisy of the Jedi by trying to kill Palpatine. Then once he made his choice he began to feel the guilt of what he did. Again, probably should have been done in a far more drawn out fashion but in the absence of a TV series to show a longer transition, we got the "wont someone please think of the children" scene.
A few stormtroopers? We're not talking about a handful here, we're talking about being outnumbered by huge amounts. Also never underestimate the element of surprise, that usually makes up for being outnumbered so imagine what it's like when you're outnumbered to begin with.
The turning to the darkside was set in motion from the second one. Sure it was accelerated somewhat during the latter portions of the third one, but thats what you get from showing it in a film. Lets not forget what Yoda said "Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate". It was his fear which led him down the wrong path. The fear of being taken for granted, the fear of being an outcast, the fear of losing his one true love. Fear is a powerful emotion, which has corrupted bigger men in history than some fictional character in a Sci Fi fantasy film.
I know I'm going to be lambasted for this and let me say right from the start I don't like the majority of Star Wars, but I really liked Episode 3.
To me it was one of the few ones who's plot was reasonably believable. Reasonably good build up, some tension thrown in, no overwhelmingly painful, tediously dragged out love story, good depiction of a coup and to top it off, only a few unanswered questions about what had taken place.
Star Trek story lines usually had an air of believability to them. Granted some series had too many encounters with time travel (I'm looking at you Voyager), holodeck accidents (I'm looking at you TNG) and the Mirror Universe (I'm looking at you DS9), but you could usually find decent explanations for most things. To be honest I like the TV series approach better than the films, as was stated by others here, you have more time to develop characters, more time to develop lore and culture but you also invariably have more time to create garbage and bullshit. But overall I feel that the genius to bullshit ratio of Star Trek far exceeds that of Star Wars
Agreed. Another example of mods using points to mod down what they disagree with.
I installed a Heisenberg Uncertainty Compensator on my post, so you can know everything about it.
Just because an IT department is strict does not mean the IT guys themselves are. Many feel they are above the law.
You're right, which is why its usually a good idea to isolate your IT Security team from the IT department at large. Don't give them access to implement policy, just make it and monitor for abuses.
You can play Counter strike with bots, but I don't think you'll see many people playing it that way. I still think it will be firmly in the minority.
I meant played the single player through. I played it for about 5 - 10 minutes when the game first came out, mainly to ensure I knew the controls before playing online, but quickly realised how bad the AI is compared to human counterparts
Who honestly plays the single player version of L4D or L4D2?
The entire game is based around the idea of other humans playing with you, not some bot. I don't have any statistics to back this up, but I would be very surprised if there were anywhere near the number of people playing single player that would qualify the statement of it having "strong single player". In fact I'd say its probably got one of the weakest single player modes of any single player games out there. Neither I, nor any of my friends have played the single player and infact we've had conversations about the futility of even providing a single player version of the game.
This all depends on your definition on what a realistic shooter actually is. Are you talking about Modern Warfare? Bad Company? Left 4 Dead?
These are arcade style FPS. Now a game like Arma 2 is what I would consider a realistic shooter.
When you reload, its based on clips rather than ammo count. Weapons behave and look like their real world counter part and sound effects are accurate. You mainly hear the sound of the bullets breaking the sound barrier.
Alpha Protocol was terrible!! More Knights of the Old Republic please!
That is a feature of this game. I read it on an IGN article recently (there was also video footage of this in a demo). I'll find the article once I'm at home, IGN is blocked in work.
And tell me this which is the overwhelming kind of automobile accident? If you suddenly had to pay massive costs to cover the damage that you did to someone else's car in a relatively minor accident, could you afford it? Could the average Joe?
Not to mention the fact that that in a system where by the law requires you to have insurance every one is ensured to have financial costs covered in the event of an accident which isn't their fault.
Now if you have a complaint about how the insurance companies handle themselves in claims or how much they charge, I have no qualms with you, but mandatory insurance is a sensible solution.
Ha ha, no worries, I'm a massive west wing fanboy!
To understand my (bad) joke, watch this
Are you from The Organisation of Cartographers for Social Equality?
Exactly my point. I don't know why I was labeled off-topic considering someone asked the question...
Stop that! It's SILLY. Very SILLY indeed! Started off as a nice little idea about the people responsible being fired but now it's just got SILLY! The post is far too short, too, and you can tell those are not proper statements! CLEAR OUT, THE LOT OF YOU!
Well considering the only people who identify themselves as 'Americans' (Pronounced: A-mur-i-cans) are United States citizens, I'm going to take a wild guess that he's talking about United States citizens.
Any way the wind blows
I can tell that you previously worked in IT Security because you're the only one who actually considered things beyond your immediate point of view.
First off, to all of you who claim I am on a power trip, this is simply not the case. I don't want to do this job. I, in fact, hate this aspect of my job. I do it because it is my job and because I understand the risks the company is exposed to which most people are ignorant to. I'm an IT security professional, not some egocentric maniac. I don't abuse my position, I don't bypass the content blocking. I do my job and I do it professionally.
Second, I'm not saying that we have a zero tolerance to anything non-work related, but what I do say is that where the companies interests are threatened, we do actively block the content and if someone does circumnavigate the block, we monitor usage to ensure that they're not.
Third, in relation to webmail, we block this not to stop you emailing your friends, we do this to ensure that our data STAYS on our network within our control. We want to ensure that your not stealing large quantities of data or leaking it accidentally by sending it unencrypted across non secure channels. Our internal email solution provides this security. You can bring in your USB drives all you want but our USB restricted thin clients prevent you from uploading/downloading anything to/or from the network for the same reasons.
What many people in these comments fail to realise is that there are reasons for security policies beyond what you initially think is the reason for it.
Yes I can see how these measures may appear (and in some cases actually be draconian) but there are solid reasons behind them and perhaps you wouldn't abuse your webmail access, or your USB access or any of the other form of access that we have restricted, there are people who would. The threat of Employee Fraud is massive. IT Security needs to be keenly aware of this and needs to take steps to prevent it.