One secure sight in Culpeper, VA; the other site in El Segundo, CA. These sites both seem rather exposed to attack, compared to the vast interior of America. Why no secure site in the empty, hard-to-bomb middle of the country?
Also, check out the googlemap of El Segundo -- it's right next door to a buttload of chemical (gasoline?) storage tanks. I've heard there's a risk of those things going "boom" in a real real nasty way, if some smallish explosion sets them off. Seems like a kinda shitty spot to locate critical internet infrastructure.
there's a reason oracle bought mysql; it's the superior product bar none. And it takes high paying DBA jobs away from oracle admins.
Huh? The good grace of the gods has mostly spared me ever having to deal with Oracle. But I can say with certainty that MySQL choked (i.e. reverted to a seq scan of ~70m rows) on my wussy little 50-line machine-generated queries. (PostgreSQL likes them just fine.) As much as I hate Oracle & Ellison for ideological reasons, I just cannot imagine the Oracle SQL engine choking on a modestly-big query like that.
I can't remember anywhere I've ever worked where you were allowed to surf the fucking internet.
I'm not quite sure what you mean when you say none of your jobs have permitted employees to surf the net. Sure, most (tho anecdotal evidence says not all) bosses would be quite pissed if a worker wasted away his entire day browsing the net, or even just wasted enough time that it impaired his work performance. But it would be a bit tyrannical for a company to ban all net access. I've only even heard of such a policy a few times, and always in very low skill (e.g. customer service phone monkey) positions.
Personally, I could not actually do my job without internet access. If I had to spend hours struggling by myself with a programming issue, instead of looking it up on the web in 30 seconds, I wouldn't get jack done. Unsurprisingly therefore, I have never worked at even a single job that imposed serious restrictions on internet access. They may, or may not, have had some web filters to block porno. But watching porno at work is kinda stupid -- I'd be a lot more concerned about my boss or coworker walking up and seeing it, than about some (probably not too hard to circumvent) filter.
Even in a couple quite high security financial systems jobs, there were no obvious restrictions. However, at those jobs they made it very clear that everything one did was monitored and recorded. Which, given the sensitive nature of the work, seemed entirely reasonable.
Maybe the guys at Burst.net are neither villains nor tools.
As I understand it, when the Stasi want something removed from the net, they typically send a National Security Letter demanding said removal, and forbidding disclosure of their demand. One convenient way to bring light to a secret removal order is for the hosting company to comply with it in a way that maximizes inconvenience to the internet community at large. It's a nice alternative to quietly silencing a blog without due process in open court -- who does that anymore? -- that probably (probably...) won't get anyone from Burst.net thrown into the Gulag, sued into destitution, or disappeared off to Guantanamo for some "enhanced interrogation".
Because it does take a lot of work that is not easily documented to produce music for example. Musicians practice and perfect music over time. As a musician myself, I can tell you I have spent countless hours just trying to come up with a song.
Learning to be a surgeon also takes a lot of work. That's why surgery costs so much. But there's no expectation that the patient will continue to pay the surgeon year after year so long as he lives. If you think your job is really hard, ask for a lot of money to do it. Maybe, if you're good, the market will pay you. But don't demand laws that restrict the freedom & creativity of all the rest of society, in the hope you'll be able to keep squeezing money out of people long after you did the actual labor in question.
Huh - I've never heard of a retail outlet that failed because of women stealing bras from the packages, but it's still illegal and wrong.
Why does pap like this get modded insightful? The old fallacy of equating violation of government granted monopoly on distribution to the theft of physical goods is just tired, and needs to be put out of its misery. I can respect, even if I do not agree with, arguments about public benefit, incentive to create, willingness of investors to finance, etc. But this talk of "theft" is nothing but intellectually dishonest horseshit.
Oh btw: shoplifting of products, "shrinkage" in retail parlance, is a common reason for stores to suffer provable financial losses. Wikipedia puts the figure at $12 billion annually, citing the National Retail Security Survey.
Gee, I wonder why you find yourself in confrontations like this. Maybe it's a result of, like, your time travel from 1968, man? Whoa, that's heavy.
He probably finds himself in such situations because the pigs have gotten way out of line, and no longer have any respect for the civil society who pay their (overly generous and recession-proof) salaries.
But note that the public transit system is also a privilege and therefore can be revoked at any time and for any reason.
I hope you are just explaining the retarded legal fictions by which we are oppressed, and that you don't actually believe such nonsense. If "public" has any meaning whatsoever, then riding the public transit system is definitely not a "privilege" for a citizen.
That does not, however, excuse what Greenwald characterises as 'despicable' behaviour by Lamo.
That, or Lamo has been p0wned by the NSA/CIA/etc for years. It was a serious misjudgment for Manning to confide in a hacker already known to have been compromised.
Somebody will then have to spend the night awake next to their phone and record the timestamp of hearing the noise.)
Thus the need for an RF geek with fancy equipment. No doubt there are instruments that will log RF activity over time, without requiring an operator to be present & alert to write things down.
Turns out they don’t, it’s just a total of use from the entire day that accumulated a lot of tiny data transfers made by the iPhone’s system which are too numerous and trivial to itemize on the bill.
Do we know this? TFA presents that as a speculative explanation, but offers no evidence. All these Apple types are relying on what their telephone bill says -- which seems kinda naive, given that cellphone carriers are not exactly known for their truthfulness.
What we really need is an RF geek to set up some equipment to monitor an iPhone's overnight radio activity, and give us some hard data to consider.
In this economy, they will probably work for 75% of the prima donna they just fired, because after months of interviews, they know they aren't going to do much better, and some income is better than no income.
You seem to have a rather imaginative idea of how hard it is for skilled people to find jobs in "this economy". For better or worse -- certainly worse for society, and most likely worse for you personally -- recessions do not have equal impact on all classes of workers.
The vast majority of people that do FOSS work do it unpaid, and on their own time.
False.
I've yet to find a stockbroker that works for "the love of the game".
Can't talk about stock brokers per se -- they're a dying, dinosaur breed anyways -- but I've met plenty of investors who play the markets because they find it fun/exciting/fascinating/etc.
why isn't anyone questioning "armed robbery" over simple "robbery"?
Interesting question. I'm not sure I see any good reason that armed robbery is worse than simple robbery. Someone might argue that an armed robber is more likely to injure his victim than an un-armed robber -- but in the absence of actual data indicating that, I have my doubts. A man with a gun can rob me just by brandishing his weapon -- whereas an unarmed man who wants to rob me, will probably have to kick my ass in a fistfight. Much more likely for me to get injured by the latter than the former.
Oh please, google map is not some privilege of citizenship. Anyone in the world is welcome -- in fact, they are eagerly invited -- by Google to use the service. Google makes this public service freely available to everyone in hopes they can make money selling advertising. If a burglar eats at McDonald's shortly before committing his crime, has he abused his "privilege" of using fast food technology? Where does it stop?
Very few, if any, criminals will be dissuaded by this law. The additional year of punishment must be discounted by the quite low probability of being caught -- and balanced against the utility of good information (provided by sources like Google map) in avoiding detection & capture. The primary effects of this measure are to a) cast the Law as a whole into even greater disrepute among knowledgeable people, owing to the arbitrariness and injustice of the statute; and b) gain some idiot politician a little additional support among his idiot constituents.
not when you signed up on one plan only to have the rules change
In that case, they are ripping you off because they are changing the terms of your 'contract' without your consent; not because they are charging by the GB per se. Sadly, the kind of 'contract' that one 'agrees' to in order to access broadband service isn't much of a a real contract at all, seeing as how it it can be changed at will by one party without the other party's consent.
Charging per GB used is totally reasonable. As a customer one might prefer a flat-rate unlimited deal; but it's pretty well impossible to say they are ripping you off if they charge you more when you use more.
Otoh, the proposed rate structure is pretty tardalicious.
If you walk out of your house some day and your car is gone, don't call the police, somebody just might be "sharing" your car.
Here's the big diff: If someone takes my car, then I wouldn't have a car anymore. If I make a copy of someone's data, they still have their data. See how those two acts aren't even similar?
Slashdot Mirror
But that still leaves me with no sympathy for a programmer earning a mere six figures.
Obviously you've never had to pay rent in Manhattan... :P
One secure sight in Culpeper, VA; the other site in El Segundo, CA. These sites both seem rather exposed to attack, compared to the vast interior of America. Why no secure site in the empty, hard-to-bomb middle of the country?
Also, check out the googlemap of El Segundo -- it's right next door to a buttload of chemical (gasoline?) storage tanks. I've heard there's a risk of those things going "boom" in a real real nasty way, if some smallish explosion sets them off. Seems like a kinda shitty spot to locate critical internet infrastructure.
there's a reason oracle bought mysql; it's the superior product bar none. And it takes high paying DBA jobs away from oracle admins.
Huh? The good grace of the gods has mostly spared me ever having to deal with Oracle. But I can say with certainty that MySQL choked (i.e. reverted to a seq scan of ~70m rows) on my wussy little 50-line machine-generated queries. (PostgreSQL likes them just fine.) As much as I hate Oracle & Ellison for ideological reasons, I just cannot imagine the Oracle SQL engine choking on a modestly-big query like that.
Idealism is wonderful, but it doesn't pay the rent.
Maybe your rent is too high?
I can't remember anywhere I've ever worked where you were allowed to surf the fucking internet.
I'm not quite sure what you mean when you say none of your jobs have permitted employees to surf the net. Sure, most (tho anecdotal evidence says not all) bosses would be quite pissed if a worker wasted away his entire day browsing the net, or even just wasted enough time that it impaired his work performance. But it would be a bit tyrannical for a company to ban all net access. I've only even heard of such a policy a few times, and always in very low skill (e.g. customer service phone monkey) positions.
Personally, I could not actually do my job without internet access. If I had to spend hours struggling by myself with a programming issue, instead of looking it up on the web in 30 seconds, I wouldn't get jack done. Unsurprisingly therefore, I have never worked at even a single job that imposed serious restrictions on internet access. They may, or may not, have had some web filters to block porno. But watching porno at work is kinda stupid -- I'd be a lot more concerned about my boss or coworker walking up and seeing it, than about some (probably not too hard to circumvent) filter.
Even in a couple quite high security financial systems jobs, there were no obvious restrictions. However, at those jobs they made it very clear that everything one did was monitored and recorded. Which, given the sensitive nature of the work, seemed entirely reasonable.
Maybe the guys at Burst.net are neither villains nor tools.
As I understand it, when the Stasi want something removed from the net, they typically send a National Security Letter demanding said removal, and forbidding disclosure of their demand. One convenient way to bring light to a secret removal order is for the hosting company to comply with it in a way that maximizes inconvenience to the internet community at large. It's a nice alternative to quietly silencing a blog without due process in open court -- who does that anymore? -- that probably (probably...) won't get anyone from Burst.net thrown into the Gulag, sued into destitution, or disappeared off to Guantanamo for some "enhanced interrogation".
Because it does take a lot of work that is not easily documented to produce music for example. Musicians practice and perfect music over time. As a musician myself, I can tell you I have spent countless hours just trying to come up with a song.
Learning to be a surgeon also takes a lot of work. That's why surgery costs so much. But there's no expectation that the patient will continue to pay the surgeon year after year so long as he lives. If you think your job is really hard, ask for a lot of money to do it. Maybe, if you're good, the market will pay you. But don't demand laws that restrict the freedom & creativity of all the rest of society, in the hope you'll be able to keep squeezing money out of people long after you did the actual labor in question.
Huh - I've never heard of a retail outlet that failed because of women stealing bras from the packages, but it's still illegal and wrong.
Why does pap like this get modded insightful? The old fallacy of equating violation of government granted monopoly on distribution to the theft of physical goods is just tired, and needs to be put out of its misery. I can respect, even if I do not agree with, arguments about public benefit, incentive to create, willingness of investors to finance, etc. But this talk of "theft" is nothing but intellectually dishonest horseshit.
Oh btw: shoplifting of products, "shrinkage" in retail parlance, is a common reason for stores to suffer provable financial losses. Wikipedia puts the figure at $12 billion annually, citing the National Retail Security Survey.
Gee, I wonder why you find yourself in confrontations like this. Maybe it's a result of, like, your time travel from 1968, man? Whoa, that's heavy.
He probably finds himself in such situations because the pigs have gotten way out of line, and no longer have any respect for the civil society who pay their (overly generous and recession-proof) salaries.
But note that the public transit system is also a privilege and therefore can be revoked at any time and for any reason.
I hope you are just explaining the retarded legal fictions by which we are oppressed, and that you don't actually believe such nonsense. If "public" has any meaning whatsoever, then riding the public transit system is definitely not a "privilege" for a citizen.
That does not, however, excuse what Greenwald characterises as 'despicable' behaviour by Lamo.
That, or Lamo has been p0wned by the NSA/CIA/etc for years. It was a serious misjudgment for Manning to confide in a hacker already known to have been compromised.
Somebody will then have to spend the night awake next to their phone and record the timestamp of hearing the noise.)
Thus the need for an RF geek with fancy equipment. No doubt there are instruments that will log RF activity over time, without requiring an operator to be present & alert to write things down.
Turns out they don’t, it’s just a total of use from the entire day that accumulated a lot of tiny data transfers made by the iPhone’s system which are too numerous and trivial to itemize on the bill.
Do we know this? TFA presents that as a speculative explanation, but offers no evidence. All these Apple types are relying on what their telephone bill says -- which seems kinda naive, given that cellphone carriers are not exactly known for their truthfulness.
What we really need is an RF geek to set up some equipment to monitor an iPhone's overnight radio activity, and give us some hard data to consider.
In this economy, they will probably work for 75% of the prima donna they just fired, because after months of interviews, they know they aren't going to do much better, and some income is better than no income.
You seem to have a rather imaginative idea of how hard it is for skilled people to find jobs in "this economy". For better or worse -- certainly worse for society, and most likely worse for you personally -- recessions do not have equal impact on all classes of workers.
Supporting the IT pro in the enterprise can be profitable. But supporting the home and SOHO user? That's a much tougher proposition.
Are you asserting that IBM, Google, & Oracle do manage to make money selling support to home users?
The vast majority of people that do FOSS work do it unpaid, and on their own time.
False.
I've yet to find a stockbroker that works for "the love of the game".
Can't talk about stock brokers per se -- they're a dying, dinosaur breed anyways -- but I've met plenty of investors who play the markets because they find it fun/exciting/fascinating/etc.
Absolutely. It is definitely worse to rob a man and beat the crap out of him. Because it's two crimes.
why isn't anyone questioning "armed robbery" over simple "robbery"?
Interesting question. I'm not sure I see any good reason that armed robbery is worse than simple robbery. Someone might argue that an armed robber is more likely to injure his victim than an un-armed robber -- but in the absence of actual data indicating that, I have my doubts. A man with a gun can rob me just by brandishing his weapon -- whereas an unarmed man who wants to rob me, will probably have to kick my ass in a fistfight. Much more likely for me to get injured by the latter than the former.
Good point.. so long as he didn't check his gmail while he was at the library.
Oh please, google map is not some privilege of citizenship. Anyone in the world is welcome -- in fact, they are eagerly invited -- by Google to use the service. Google makes this public service freely available to everyone in hopes they can make money selling advertising. If a burglar eats at McDonald's shortly before committing his crime, has he abused his "privilege" of using fast food technology? Where does it stop?
Very few, if any, criminals will be dissuaded by this law. The additional year of punishment must be discounted by the quite low probability of being caught -- and balanced against the utility of good information (provided by sources like Google map) in avoiding detection & capture. The primary effects of this measure are to a) cast the Law as a whole into even greater disrepute among knowledgeable people, owing to the arbitrariness and injustice of the statute; and b) gain some idiot politician a little additional support among his idiot constituents.
I mean why stop at just one when we can tack on all kinds of useless,
yes
unconstitutional,
quote possibly
soon to be struck down by the courts
alas, probably not.
nonsense
They'll just ask Google, and Google will tell them.
not when you signed up on one plan only to have the rules change
In that case, they are ripping you off because they are changing the terms of your 'contract' without your consent; not because they are charging by the GB per se. Sadly, the kind of 'contract' that one 'agrees' to in order to access broadband service isn't much of a a real contract at all, seeing as how it it can be changed at will by one party without the other party's consent.
Charging per GB used is totally reasonable. As a customer one might prefer a flat-rate unlimited deal; but it's pretty well impossible to say they are ripping you off if they charge you more when you use more.
Otoh, the proposed rate structure is pretty tardalicious.
If you walk out of your house some day and your car is gone, don't call the police, somebody just might be "sharing" your car.
Here's the big diff: If someone takes my car, then I wouldn't have a car anymore. If I make a copy of someone's data, they still have their data. See how those two acts aren't even similar?