It's also interesting in the way they chose to censor it. Tom Cruise got censored when he "received Mohammed's goo", but it was done in the exact same way Mohammed in the bear suit was, implying a joke. Presumably Matt and Trey did not have Tom transform into Mohammed, since not showing Mohammed was the joke to begin with; perhaps he transformed into a bear suit too or something along those lines. Whatever was really there, CC had no need to censor the image of Cruise, since Muslims would not have had a problem with Cruise in a bear suit or whatever. Censoring him in the same way was, again, a joke.
As for the end speech being entirely bleeped, if it's true that it didn't mention Mohammed at all, then bleeping it makes no sense at all. This is the network that had no problem with 216 utterances of the word shit after all; what could Stan and Kyle possibly been saying that was so offensive? Again, it seemed like this was a joke, poking fun at the whole censorship thing.
What's disturbing here is that, if it's true CC made these censors without Matt and Trey's knowledge, then they were not only censoring, but adding or changing jokes in the episode as well. Censorship is one thing, but creatively changing an episode...I would think that from the creators eyes that would be even worse, and I can't believe CC would dare do such a thing.
Despite the statement, I'm still not convinced this isn't all some big hoax or joke. The censoring done in the episode just doesn't make any sense, unless it's part of the episode, jokes about the whole situation.
...for a community that loves to bash companies about "buggy whips" and "adapt or die", we sure do love to hold onto our outdated, largely useless tech ourselves, don't we?
Translation of the previous sentence for the benefit of Moderators: "Please mod this comment down to the 13th level of Hell"
Gizmodo links this technology to Minority Report, and certainly not without cause, but the movie that really ought to worry you here is Gattaca. What happens to kids this software flags with a high potential for future criminal activity? If companies start taking this data seriously, a lot of them won't be hiring these kids. And while it was genetics that was the profiling mechanism in Gattaca, considering we've already cracked the human genome, it can only be a matter of time before someone decides to take a similar piece of software and run it against someone's DNA.
Wife and I went to see Clash of the Titans 3D this weekend. Mixed bag in my opinion.
I have an astigmatism in one eye, and basically whenever I get glasses, the one eye is usually a bit "off", regardless of how much the eye doctor does the "Is 1 or 2 better...1....or 2...." thing, as telling the difference becomes an exercise in frustration. It's not a problem in everyday life, but having the 3D glasses on magnifies the effect, to the point where I was constantly adjusting both my glasses and the 3D ones.
Also, it could have just been the glasses my wife and I were given, but it seemed like wearing them significantly dampened the brightness of the movie. Which became annoying in, say, Medusa's Cave or any other dark part of the movie. Considering how directors love to use darkness to hide CGI imperfections these days, I could see this as being a serious problem.
There were definitely some "Oh, wow" parts of the 3D experience, but overall, I think I'll be taking a pass until the technology gets better, or it's basically forced upon me.
Thanks for the info. Price would be the big thing for us; this definitely falls under the "yeah it's nice but why don't we just use Altiris" as you imply. And yet we just heard the other day that Adobe has overtaken Windows/IE/whatever it was as the most vulnerable app. If they're reasonable on price you could perhaps justify it to the boss, but $30 a station seems a bit steep.
Reading the Secunia website, it seems like this is just a new feature in their 4.0 product, which has been in beta up until today. If the way I read things is correct, it's not like WSUS will be shipping with CSI technology built in; rather, if you purchase CSI 4.0, you'll have the ability to (hopefully, presumably) roll up 3rd party patches so that WSUS will recognize them, and spit them out to clients.
Which is great, not "Wow I just pissed my pants" great like I originally thought, but still. Can anyone comment on this feature, someone who was in the beta, etc? Ballpark pricing?
Free/Open software is fine, and I won't argue the point that it's short-sighted for an IT shop to stick their head in the MS sand, but there are other, very good reasons for wanting to promote a unified network/front, especially when dealing with users. Ease of management is of course the biggie, but in general, you don't want users trying to install every piece of software their brother-in-law tells them about. If you say, "Oh yeah, throw Firefox on, whatever", then they're may assume you have the same cavalier attitude towards, say, Limewire, or AntiSpyware 2010.
If you want your company to explore/promote Free/Open software, then this needs to be done from within, with the support of management, in a controlled manner. Not by telling users they should just install Ubuntu on their laptop over the weekend.
Working for a medical university that still uses Novell:
It's a mixed bag, honestly. Groupwise is still pretty great as a messaging/collaboration platform, but for some reason Novell seems bound and determined to ignore it as much as possible. The latest Webmail version is pretty nice, but conversely, the Groupwise Mobile component is floundering, after trying to implement a version of Intellisync and getting cut off at the knees by Nokia. Novell has been moving the file system/server stuff to SUSE for some time now, but on the other hand, no one seems to really know exactly what to do with all those damn Windows clients long term. As for eDirectory, it's great and all, but if no one's using Groupwise or moving to SUSE, what future does it really have?
If I live a thousand years I'll never understand why Novell didn't open source Groupwise several years ago, and in one move come to dominate the Linux Groupware market. Perhaps smarter people than me at Novell foresaw the move to online services, but I doubt it; at the very least they could have spun it off to another company and made some bucks on it. It would arguably still be a good idea, as I could see it filling a niche, but probably the real opportunity has been lost.
We're moving away from almost all things Novell. Investigated the possibility of both Outlook and Outlook@EDU, and while those stalled, the writing is on the wall. NDS client will probably be off all workstations within a couple years, file sharing/password management will be moved to Windows servers. eDirectory/Novell Services may linger on for a while, as we've got a semi-complicated identity management system going on it, and we've rolled out some SUSE as necessary, but we're almost being forced to move things Windows-way out of necessity/attrition.
...to only buy versions of their games every few years, despite the fact that EA traditionally only makes cosmetic and superficial changes to yearly release games, yet of course charges full price for them. When you think about it, it's damn near like stealing.
At least we know the good people at EA are continuing to find innovative and new ways to be evil.
Look, you might as well be honest about it. T Boone owns your university at this point, everyone knows it. You may as well just rename it for him and get it over with.
im not dealing with this shit today.i will call johnston in earlyford shut down there plants and im not answering why we are still working.fuck this. FROM: RYDER LITTLEJOHN (x18914) (3
I bet someone felt like a real asshole after sending that. So sorry that one of the greatest tragedies in the countries history screwed up your day.
“A universe filled with matter will contract down to a small—but finite—size and then bounce out again, giving us the expanding cosmos we see today,” he says. Brandenberger’s calculations show that ripples produced by the bounce match those already detected by satellites measuring the cosmic microwave background, and he is now looking for signatures that could distinguish the bounce from the big bang scenario.
Maybe I'm just missing something obvious, but my understanding is that current measurements/observations point to an ever expanding universe, that is doomed to end via heat death. This statement would seem to wildly contradict this.
A lot of people bashing Sharepoint, no surprise there, but here's something you need to be aware of. Sharepoint is where projects go to die. Seriously, nothing kills a project faster, and more quietly, than putting it on Sharepoint.
Dead projects may seem like a bad idea, but we all know that not every project deserves life. Take a server, install Sharepoint/Sharepoint Services on it, and wait. When you get "that project", the one no one wants to touch with a 10 foot pole, that's when it's time for Sharepoint. You can make a case for using it for just about anything. Collaboration is a very powerful buzzword.
Setup a bare bones template site to use for anything like this that comes along, customize it for the walking dead project in question, give all the users rights, a brief tutorial on how to login and use it, then wait. If they want more training, say that you will look into off-site or online training options to stall. You'll find that a few eager beavers will upload a few documents, customize a few things, maybe even send out a workflow or something, but all activity on the site should wither and die within two weeks. If you happen to get some savant who just thinks it's great and is trying to spur everyone else into using it, make him and admin of the site. That will sufficiently bog him down. Within 6 months, they'll be back to printing out emails and meeting in person to avoid having to use the site.
In the end, it doesn't really matter if it's a data center failure or a "cloud" failure. It matters who the user blames. And if you trumpet yourself as "in the cloud", and then that cloud rains on your consumer, whomever is at fault, ultimately it's you, the provider, who has a problem.
To be somewhat fair to McAfee, it did detect a couple coming from one machine, MWS and SmartShopper, but this was very late in the process, well after the user had reported seeing the FakeAV pop-up and (apparently) after the machine had been infected. Perhaps these are McAfee names for some of the ones listed above and my reporting was just slow, don't know.
Also just for the record, we run EPO 4, Agent 4.0.0.1494 (as of yesterday, latest agent patch) and VirusScan 8.7.0i, Patch 1 (Patch 2 is out as of yesterday I believe, we'll be going to that soon). The so-called "Antivirus 2009" or "Antispyware 2009" and all it's variants have slipped past McAfee at least a half a dozen times in the past 3 weeks or so on our network. These are all domain machines, EPO protected, completely managed; it's not like we just have a hodge-podge of out of date titles or whatever. Go check out the McAfee forums, there are a few topics with people complaining about this as well.
I'm with you, I'm quite concerned about this. But outside of going around to 300 personal computer's (that's for the "CPU" nerdrage above) and scanning them individually with Malwarebytes or MSE I'm not really sure what to do. I'm kind of hopeful McAfee gets their shit, or rather their DAT's, together and can at least start alerting me on these, so we're not completely in the dark.
Tell me about it. We've had to resort to sending out emails with screenshots of various Antivirus 2009 screens cribbed from ISC and other places. "Hey, see this? Don't click on it". And I know it won't do a damn bit of good.
McAfee is bad lately as well. Completely ignored the infection of two machines on our network the other day. We had to use Malwarebytes to find on one, and interestingly enough, Microsoft Security Essentials seemed to do a good job at finding and cleaning the other one.
McAfee not even detecting these is worrisome though. We've got like 300 CPU's, all EPO protected, and for all I know they could all be infected.
Slashdot Mirror
Somebody wants information about human sexuality removed from an encyclopedia or he's going to walk? I say, let him and his puritanical beliefs walk.
Actually that's not what this is about at all. Feel free to read the article next time, so you can speak intelligently with the rest of the adults.
It's also interesting in the way they chose to censor it. Tom Cruise got censored when he "received Mohammed's goo", but it was done in the exact same way Mohammed in the bear suit was, implying a joke. Presumably Matt and Trey did not have Tom transform into Mohammed, since not showing Mohammed was the joke to begin with; perhaps he transformed into a bear suit too or something along those lines. Whatever was really there, CC had no need to censor the image of Cruise, since Muslims would not have had a problem with Cruise in a bear suit or whatever. Censoring him in the same way was, again, a joke.
As for the end speech being entirely bleeped, if it's true that it didn't mention Mohammed at all, then bleeping it makes no sense at all. This is the network that had no problem with 216 utterances of the word shit after all; what could Stan and Kyle possibly been saying that was so offensive? Again, it seemed like this was a joke, poking fun at the whole censorship thing.
What's disturbing here is that, if it's true CC made these censors without Matt and Trey's knowledge, then they were not only censoring, but adding or changing jokes in the episode as well. Censorship is one thing, but creatively changing an episode...I would think that from the creators eyes that would be even worse, and I can't believe CC would dare do such a thing.
Despite the statement, I'm still not convinced this isn't all some big hoax or joke. The censoring done in the episode just doesn't make any sense, unless it's part of the episode, jokes about the whole situation.
...for a community that loves to bash companies about "buggy whips" and "adapt or die", we sure do love to hold onto our outdated, largely useless tech ourselves, don't we?
Translation of the previous sentence for the benefit of Moderators: "Please mod this comment down to the 13th level of Hell"
Well, it's one louder...err faster, isn't it?
Gizmodo links this technology to Minority Report, and certainly not without cause, but the movie that really ought to worry you here is Gattaca. What happens to kids this software flags with a high potential for future criminal activity? If companies start taking this data seriously, a lot of them won't be hiring these kids. And while it was genetics that was the profiling mechanism in Gattaca, considering we've already cracked the human genome, it can only be a matter of time before someone decides to take a similar piece of software and run it against someone's DNA.
Wife and I went to see Clash of the Titans 3D this weekend. Mixed bag in my opinion.
I have an astigmatism in one eye, and basically whenever I get glasses, the one eye is usually a bit "off", regardless of how much the eye doctor does the "Is 1 or 2 better...1....or 2...." thing, as telling the difference becomes an exercise in frustration. It's not a problem in everyday life, but having the 3D glasses on magnifies the effect, to the point where I was constantly adjusting both my glasses and the 3D ones.
Also, it could have just been the glasses my wife and I were given, but it seemed like wearing them significantly dampened the brightness of the movie. Which became annoying in, say, Medusa's Cave or any other dark part of the movie. Considering how directors love to use darkness to hide CGI imperfections these days, I could see this as being a serious problem.
There were definitely some "Oh, wow" parts of the 3D experience, but overall, I think I'll be taking a pass until the technology gets better, or it's basically forced upon me.
We're going Fivesquare
Now I won't have to decline all those useless Itanium updates in WSUS console every month.
Thanks for the info. Price would be the big thing for us; this definitely falls under the "yeah it's nice but why don't we just use Altiris" as you imply. And yet we just heard the other day that Adobe has overtaken Windows/IE/whatever it was as the most vulnerable app. If they're reasonable on price you could perhaps justify it to the boss, but $30 a station seems a bit steep.
Reading the Secunia website, it seems like this is just a new feature in their 4.0 product, which has been in beta up until today. If the way I read things is correct, it's not like WSUS will be shipping with CSI technology built in; rather, if you purchase CSI 4.0, you'll have the ability to (hopefully, presumably) roll up 3rd party patches so that WSUS will recognize them, and spit them out to clients.
Which is great, not "Wow I just pissed my pants" great like I originally thought, but still. Can anyone comment on this feature, someone who was in the beta, etc? Ballpark pricing?
Free/Open software is fine, and I won't argue the point that it's short-sighted for an IT shop to stick their head in the MS sand, but there are other, very good reasons for wanting to promote a unified network/front, especially when dealing with users. Ease of management is of course the biggie, but in general, you don't want users trying to install every piece of software their brother-in-law tells them about. If you say, "Oh yeah, throw Firefox on, whatever", then they're may assume you have the same cavalier attitude towards, say, Limewire, or AntiSpyware 2010.
If you want your company to explore/promote Free/Open software, then this needs to be done from within, with the support of management, in a controlled manner. Not by telling users they should just install Ubuntu on their laptop over the weekend.
Working for a medical university that still uses Novell:
It's a mixed bag, honestly. Groupwise is still pretty great as a messaging/collaboration platform, but for some reason Novell seems bound and determined to ignore it as much as possible. The latest Webmail version is pretty nice, but conversely, the Groupwise Mobile component is floundering, after trying to implement a version of Intellisync and getting cut off at the knees by Nokia. Novell has been moving the file system/server stuff to SUSE for some time now, but on the other hand, no one seems to really know exactly what to do with all those damn Windows clients long term. As for eDirectory, it's great and all, but if no one's using Groupwise or moving to SUSE, what future does it really have?
If I live a thousand years I'll never understand why Novell didn't open source Groupwise several years ago, and in one move come to dominate the Linux Groupware market. Perhaps smarter people than me at Novell foresaw the move to online services, but I doubt it; at the very least they could have spun it off to another company and made some bucks on it. It would arguably still be a good idea, as I could see it filling a niche, but probably the real opportunity has been lost.
We're moving away from almost all things Novell. Investigated the possibility of both Outlook and Outlook@EDU, and while those stalled, the writing is on the wall. NDS client will probably be off all workstations within a couple years, file sharing/password management will be moved to Windows servers. eDirectory/Novell Services may linger on for a while, as we've got a semi-complicated identity management system going on it, and we've rolled out some SUSE as necessary, but we're almost being forced to move things Windows-way out of necessity/attrition.
...to only buy versions of their games every few years, despite the fact that EA traditionally only makes cosmetic and superficial changes to yearly release games, yet of course charges full price for them. When you think about it, it's damn near like stealing.
At least we know the good people at EA are continuing to find innovative and new ways to be evil.
Look, you might as well be honest about it. T Boone owns your university at this point, everyone knows it. You may as well just rename it for him and get it over with.
Which is why it will never, never happen. You'll learn the truth about Roswell and JFK before you see those emails.
Going to the mat is also a legitimate phrase, and does indeed have the meaning you bring up, It just isn't applicable in this case.
im not dealing with this shit today.i will call johnston in earlyford shut down there plants and im not answering why we are still working.fuck this. FROM: RYDER LITTLEJOHN (x18914) (3
I bet someone felt like a real asshole after sending that. So sorry that one of the greatest tragedies in the countries history screwed up your day.
“A universe filled with matter will contract down to a small—but finite—size and then bounce out again, giving us the expanding cosmos we see today,” he says. Brandenberger’s calculations show that ripples produced by the bounce match those already detected by satellites measuring the cosmic microwave background, and he is now looking for signatures that could distinguish the bounce from the big bang scenario.
Maybe I'm just missing something obvious, but my understanding is that current measurements/observations point to an ever expanding universe, that is doomed to end via heat death. This statement would seem to wildly contradict this.
A lot of people bashing Sharepoint, no surprise there, but here's something you need to be aware of. Sharepoint is where projects go to die. Seriously, nothing kills a project faster, and more quietly, than putting it on Sharepoint.
Dead projects may seem like a bad idea, but we all know that not every project deserves life. Take a server, install Sharepoint/Sharepoint Services on it, and wait. When you get "that project", the one no one wants to touch with a 10 foot pole, that's when it's time for Sharepoint. You can make a case for using it for just about anything. Collaboration is a very powerful buzzword.
Setup a bare bones template site to use for anything like this that comes along, customize it for the walking dead project in question, give all the users rights, a brief tutorial on how to login and use it, then wait. If they want more training, say that you will look into off-site or online training options to stall. You'll find that a few eager beavers will upload a few documents, customize a few things, maybe even send out a workflow or something, but all activity on the site should wither and die within two weeks. If you happen to get some savant who just thinks it's great and is trying to spur everyone else into using it, make him and admin of the site. That will sufficiently bog him down. Within 6 months, they'll be back to printing out emails and meeting in person to avoid having to use the site.
I love that a post that begins "I used my time modem..." can be modded as Insightful. God bless you, you crazy mods.
In the end, it doesn't really matter if it's a data center failure or a "cloud" failure. It matters who the user blames. And if you trumpet yourself as "in the cloud", and then that cloud rains on your consumer, whomever is at fault, ultimately it's you, the provider, who has a problem.
Oh and just as a follow up, yes we do have the McAfee Antispyware module installed as well.
Security Essentials detected several:
- Adware: Win32/WhenU.A (Medium Alert Level)
- Adware: Win32/ClickAlchemy (Severe)
- Adware: Win32/ABetterInternet.C (High)
- Adware: Win32/SurfPlayer (High)
- Adware: Win32/NewDotNet (High)
To be somewhat fair to McAfee, it did detect a couple coming from one machine, MWS and SmartShopper, but this was very late in the process, well after the user had reported seeing the FakeAV pop-up and (apparently) after the machine had been infected. Perhaps these are McAfee names for some of the ones listed above and my reporting was just slow, don't know.
Also just for the record, we run EPO 4, Agent 4.0.0.1494 (as of yesterday, latest agent patch) and VirusScan 8.7.0i, Patch 1 (Patch 2 is out as of yesterday I believe, we'll be going to that soon). The so-called "Antivirus 2009" or "Antispyware 2009" and all it's variants have slipped past McAfee at least a half a dozen times in the past 3 weeks or so on our network. These are all domain machines, EPO protected, completely managed; it's not like we just have a hodge-podge of out of date titles or whatever. Go check out the McAfee forums, there are a few topics with people complaining about this as well.
I'm with you, I'm quite concerned about this. But outside of going around to 300 personal computer's (that's for the "CPU" nerdrage above) and scanning them individually with Malwarebytes or MSE I'm not really sure what to do. I'm kind of hopeful McAfee gets their shit, or rather their DAT's, together and can at least start alerting me on these, so we're not completely in the dark.
Tell me about it. We've had to resort to sending out emails with screenshots of various Antivirus 2009 screens cribbed from ISC and other places. "Hey, see this? Don't click on it". And I know it won't do a damn bit of good.
McAfee is bad lately as well. Completely ignored the infection of two machines on our network the other day. We had to use Malwarebytes to find on one, and interestingly enough, Microsoft Security Essentials seemed to do a good job at finding and cleaning the other one.
McAfee not even detecting these is worrisome though. We've got like 300 CPU's, all EPO protected, and for all I know they could all be infected.