Something to keep in mind is that one of IBM's *biggest* divisions is now World Services, which is their consulting arm. Now, the consulting services people make the same amount (more or less) no matter if they do the work on Linux or AIX.
The difference is that IBM can either have 5,000 people doing AIX support, or it can have 100 or so people doing Linux support and development, and let the open source community provide the other 4,900 people.
Which do you think looks better on the balance sheet?
OK, I don't know, nor do I care, if PJ is really a 61 year old Jehovah's witness or a 98 year old monk living in a grass shack on Okinawa.
If I had been Maureen O'Gara, if I had found out this "truth" about PJ, I'd have backed away very quietly and carefully and not said a thing about what I found. It's bad enough when Darl is fuming and venting because he think some IBM front ruined his SCOsource venture with their fronted website.
Now Darl has to admit that he got bested by a single Jehovah's Witness who had hit beat on both active neuron count and morals....
It can't be secret and still be enforced. It could still actually be a law though.
That's Gilmore's point exactly - he's not complaining about the regulation that says he has to show his ID - he's complaining that he said "Where's it say that?" and he was told "We can't tell you, it's a secret".
I'm assuming that the Department of Justice is convinced there's such a law - one of the briefs they've filed in the case requests that they be allowed to explain why the regulation must be kept secret 'in camera'. In other words, Gilmore and his lawyer do not get a chance to see and contest the government's explanation.
And hey guys, we're not talking Q-clearance DOE nuclear stuff, where even the regulations of who can see it are secret. We're talking about riding on a frikking airplane - and the rules for what's permitted are secret.
From there, it's a very short step to the cops pulling you over when you're driving, and arresting you under some "secret" law you've violated, but aren't allowed to see.
I dusted off some material on the old and politically incorrect doctrine of eugenics the other day, speaking of ridiculous but popular ideas. A hundred years ago, people thought that we were facing a genetic twilight because of medical and social interventions that allowed the weak and deformed to propagate.
...
I don't need an egg to predict this: we're doomed, doomed, doomed if we can't get this epidemic of dumbed-down touchy-feely pseudoscience bullshit under control.
Ever consider the possibility that the epidemic is because the eugenicists were right?
On date A, 1 out of 100 Moms play computer games, and 20 out of 100 Slashdot readers play computer games.
At date B, 2 out of 100 Moms play computer games. 22 out of 100 Slashdot readers play computer games.
And here I was expecting you to say "On date B, 21 out of 100 Slashdot readers aren't getting a date B".....
Well, there's DoD security, which is usually actually based on fairly sane security analysis (for instance, GSA Class 5 vaults and safes only have to withstand 30 minutes or so of attack. Why? Because it's assumed that you'll never be given the chance to stand there for 30 minutes with your power tools without a Marine popping on and following their "Shoot anybody who's trying to open the safe in an inappropriate manner, even if it's the CO" orders).
But he said *REAL* paranoids... and I don't see *squat* in your reply about the constructive use of metal foil for building reverse Temptest cages (you know - where you worry about the *inbound* electromagnetic radiation rather than the outbound like us sane people..;)
So let me get this straight - the company that writes software that leaks so badly that there's a multi-billion dollar industry in selling plugs for the leaks is going to start selling plugs for an additional charge???
I'm not sure which worries me more:
The fact that they've already proven either unwilling or unable to ship a secure product (and should therefor stay out of the business of selling security add-ons).
The fact that they obviously intend to destroy said market like they have for browsers and other competitors - which gets scary when you
think of the reliability considerations. If a third-party AV is the only thing that makes using the net anywhere near safe, and there's no third-party AV vendors anymore....
The high likelyhood that the M$ AV product will burrow itself into the OS such that it can't easily be removed or replaced, similar to the way IE is glued in, to increase lock-in once you install it.
The high likelyhood that the M$ AV product is likely going to end up using yet another undocumented API to integrate into the system.
The even higher likelyhood that the M$ AV product will have access to an undocumented API that lets the OS tell the AV what vulnerabilities that particular build of the OS and IE and ActiveX and other bundled bloatware has available for viruses to exploit...
Remember everybody - Microsoft doesn't have any responsibility to the users. It does have a fiduciary responsibility to the shareholders.
Pages 14 and 15 note methods "a, b, d, and m" sanitizing fixed drives,
and continues:
"d. Overwrite all addressable locations with a character, its complement, then a
random character and verify. THIS
METHOD IS NOT APPROVED FOR SANITIZING MEDIA THAT CONTAINS TOP SECRET INFORMATION."
Note this applies to DOD contractors, and other rules probably apply to DOD, military, and the CIA/NSA/NRO/etc intelligence community.
The obvious implication is that the 3 verified passes are sufficient to render the information not worth recovering for Confidential and Secret, but that Top Secret info is still potentially recoverable within cost/benefit constraints for the opponent. Remember - for many things (except possibly some weapons systems info) you don't need to guarantee the opponent can't recover the information, you merely have to make the cost of recovery greater than the benefit they gain from the secret.
Oh, and the
Canadian RCMP TSSIT OPS-II says: "Must first be checked for correct functioning
and then have all storage areas overwritten once with the binary digit ONE,
once with the binary digit ZERO and once with a single numeric, alphabetic or
special character, "
and again, not for Top Secret - for that, they recommend contacting somebody for special instructions/handling.
OK.. up front, I'll 'fess up that I program for a living, and I play waaay too much guitar myself (side note - "programmer with 4 guitars" == "poster child for carpal tunnel syndrome";)..
And I've heard "I've always wanted to learn how to..." regarding both, plenty of times. And my standard response to that is "But why?".
Seriously - the question is equally relevant for both disciplines (and disciplines they are indeed - the number of people that can do either well without investing a lot of effort is severely limited). And quite often, I've discovered that what the person really means is "I think it would be cool/chic/whatever to be able to claim that I could....". And that's something totally different, indeed. If the person doesn't have a grasp of that distinction, it's time to turn away while shaking my head. If they really wanted to learn how, they'd have found a way to scrape up enough money to buy a dirt-cheap guitar and learned how to do it. If Robert Johnson could get a guitar, so can you...
And sometimes, the person has a fairly realistic goal in mind - one that doesn't involve a whole lot of mental and emotional investment. It doesn't take a lot of effort for somebody to learn enough guitar to not look foolish sitting around a campfire - you learn a I-IV-V progression and the associated relative minor chords in a few keys and how to strum on the beat, and you're set. Similarly, learning enough programming to write small scripts to make your life easier isn't very hard - there's enough "<Scripting Language> for Dummies" books.
However, that's a different goal from understanding either subject in depth - and neither "knowing enough to fiddle around with it" nor "truly understanding it" are the answer to the unstated question here...
I'm going to go out on a limb and speculate that simoniker's mother isn't really interested in learning to program - what she's really wondering about is "How can simoniker sit there all day typing away, when Solitaire gets boring after a few hours?". And the right answer there is "Artistic Drive".
Unfortunately, that's a very hard concept to explain to those not driven by it. It takes many forms - the artist starving because they'd rather buy paint than food, Stevie Ray Vaughn playing guitar till the calluses on his fingers bled - and then crazy-gluing them back in place and playing more, or any athlete or performer who has made personal sacrifices in the pursuit of their goals....
And those of us afflicted by it are never, and have never, and probably never will be, understood by those of us who aren't.. ey to buy a cheap one and found a way to learn.....
Contrary to popular belief, Queen Isabella knew damned well the world was round. She also knew that the Far East was some 10K miles east of her, and that the world was some 25K miles around, meaning a 15K mile ocean voyage going west. Isabella also knew just how far a ship could make it on the provisions it could carry, and it was closer to 5K miles tops than the 15K required.
This fool Columbus thought the world was only 14K miles or so, leaving a 4K mile voyage west. So Isabella sent him off with 3 leaky ships and a bunch of convicts, figuring they'd either starve or sink 5K miles out, and good riddance to the lot of them. As it was, he got very lucky in finding that previously unknown set of islands when he did....
First off, it's in a machine room, which is expected to be noisy anyhow.
Second off, I've been between rows 3 and 4 (i.e. dead center) when it's going at full blast, and I can assure you that the Xserve/G5 fans are totally drowned out by the overhead Leibert cooling fans.
*ANY* exploit that involves the 'My Computer Zone' or similar is due to bad design. When the fundamental security design is screwed, you're stuck with either throwing it out entirely, or patching, patching, patching, patching as new ways around it are found.
Keep in mind that when TJ Watson said it, his company was *already* engaged in the sale of semi-programmable card-sorting and tabulating gear, of which they were building a LOT.
What he *meant* was "There's a market for 5 really high-end machines far and above the rest of the competition". The word "supercomputer" wouldn't be around for a few decades yet. And what do you know? Even today, there's a small handful of machines at the truly high end (currently, above 5 teraflops or so)
Actually, the problem with being born with more instinctual knowledge is that it makes you *less* flexible. Humans take an amazingly long time to become self-sufficient because we have to learn everything, whereas most other creatures are born already knowing how to do most everything they need to know how to do.
The trade-off is that although a dog or cat is born with a lot more wired-in knowledge, it's severely restricted in what it can learn after that. Ponder the fact that literate humans are a lot more common than literate dogs or cats.....
OK... I'll bite.. How do you tell if the page actually has a link to you without trying to fetch the page and seeing if there's a link? This gets particularly interesting when you deal with content generated on the fly - there's a very good chance that my Slashdot page has links on it that aren't on yours, for instance, and which also won't be on the page your proposed automatic verifier will get if it blindly chases the Referer: URL back.
Slashdot Mirror
D'Oh!
;)
Yes, Global Services. That will teach me to post while in a rush to get out the door.
Seems they sold that off a while ago to a bunch called Levono....
Something to keep in mind is that one of IBM's *biggest* divisions is now World Services, which is their consulting arm. Now, the consulting services people make the same amount (more or less) no matter if they do the work on Linux or AIX.
The difference is that IBM can either have 5,000 people doing AIX support, or it can have 100 or so people doing Linux support and development, and let the open source community provide the other 4,900 people.
Which do you think looks better on the balance sheet?
If I had been Maureen O'Gara, if I had found out this "truth" about PJ, I'd have backed away very quietly and carefully and not said a thing about what I found. It's bad enough when Darl is fuming and venting because he think some IBM front ruined his SCOsource venture with their fronted website.
Now Darl has to admit that he got bested by a single Jehovah's Witness who had hit beat on both active neuron count and morals....
That's Gilmore's point exactly - he's not complaining about the regulation that says he has to show his ID - he's complaining that he said "Where's it say that?" and he was told "We can't tell you, it's a secret".
I'm assuming that the Department of Justice is convinced there's such a law - one of the briefs they've filed in the case requests that they be allowed to explain why the regulation must be kept secret 'in camera'. In other words, Gilmore and his lawyer do not get a chance to see and contest the government's explanation.
And hey guys, we're not talking Q-clearance DOE nuclear stuff, where even the regulations of who can see it are secret. We're talking about riding on a frikking airplane - and the rules for what's permitted are secret.
From there, it's a very short step to the cops pulling you over when you're driving, and arresting you under some "secret" law you've violated, but aren't allowed to see.
And that is why Gilmore is raising a fuss.
pr0n. After 10,000 years of leading technological innovation, they finally have a way to deliver it directly where it matters....
Ever consider the possibility that the epidemic is because the eugenicists were right?
Well, there's DoD security, which is usually actually based on fairly sane security analysis (for instance, GSA Class 5 vaults and safes only have to withstand 30 minutes or so of attack. Why? Because it's assumed that you'll never be given the chance to stand there for 30 minutes with your power tools without a Marine popping on and following their "Shoot anybody who's trying to open the safe in an inappropriate manner, even if it's the CO" orders).
;)
But he said *REAL* paranoids... and I don't see *squat* in your reply about the constructive use of metal foil for building reverse Temptest cages (you know - where you worry about the *inbound* electromagnetic radiation rather than the outbound like us sane people..
What would you recommend, given that Fedora Core is where all the SELinux development (you know, the stuff the NSA did?) is going on at the moment?
About the only things operating over 60K feet are military/spook planes that get to make their own rules, and SpaceShip One....
I'm not sure which worries me more:
Remember everybody - Microsoft doesn't have any responsibility to the users. It does have a fiduciary responsibility to the shareholders.
And we're seeing more proof of it right here...
Pages 14 and 15 note methods "a, b, d, and m" sanitizing fixed drives, and continues:
Note this applies to DOD contractors, and other rules probably apply to DOD, military, and the CIA/NSA/NRO/etc intelligence community.
The obvious implication is that the 3 verified passes are sufficient to render the information not worth recovering for Confidential and Secret, but that Top Secret info is still potentially recoverable within cost/benefit constraints for the opponent. Remember - for many things (except possibly some weapons systems info) you don't need to guarantee the opponent can't recover the information, you merely have to make the cost of recovery greater than the benefit they gain from the secret.
Oh, and the Canadian RCMP TSSIT OPS-II says: "Must first be checked for correct functioning and then have all storage areas overwritten once with the binary digit ONE, once with the binary digit ZERO and once with a single numeric, alphabetic or special character, " and again, not for Top Secret - for that, they recommend contacting somebody for special instructions/handling.
And I've heard "I've always wanted to learn how to..." regarding both, plenty of times. And my standard response to that is "But why? ".
Seriously - the question is equally relevant for both disciplines (and disciplines they are indeed - the number of people that can do either well without investing a lot of effort is severely limited). And quite often, I've discovered that what the person really means is "I think it would be cool/chic/whatever to be able to claim that I could....". And that's something totally different, indeed. If the person doesn't have a grasp of that distinction, it's time to turn away while shaking my head. If they really wanted to learn how, they'd have found a way to scrape up enough money to buy a dirt-cheap guitar and learned how to do it. If Robert Johnson could get a guitar, so can you...
And sometimes, the person has a fairly realistic goal in mind - one that doesn't involve a whole lot of mental and emotional investment. It doesn't take a lot of effort for somebody to learn enough guitar to not look foolish sitting around a campfire - you learn a I-IV-V progression and the associated relative minor chords in a few keys and how to strum on the beat, and you're set. Similarly, learning enough programming to write small scripts to make your life easier isn't very hard - there's enough "<Scripting Language> for Dummies" books.
However, that's a different goal from understanding either subject in depth - and neither "knowing enough to fiddle around with it" nor "truly understanding it" are the answer to the unstated question here...
I'm going to go out on a limb and speculate that simoniker's mother isn't really interested in learning to program - what she's really wondering about is "How can simoniker sit there all day typing away, when Solitaire gets boring after a few hours?". And the right answer there is "Artistic Drive".
Unfortunately, that's a very hard concept to explain to those not driven by it. It takes many forms - the artist starving because they'd rather buy paint than food, Stevie Ray Vaughn playing guitar till the calluses on his fingers bled - and then crazy-gluing them back in place and playing more, or any athlete or performer who has made personal sacrifices in the pursuit of their goals....
And those of us afflicted by it are never, and have never, and probably never will be, understood by those of us who aren't.. ey to buy a cheap one and found a way to learn.....
No. It is indeed sporting 31 languages, in the sense of "sporty" meaning "marked by conspicuous display".
Whether they are in fact supported is another question.
This fool Columbus thought the world was only 14K miles or so, leaving a 4K mile voyage west. So Isabella sent him off with 3 leaky ships and a bunch of convicts, figuring they'd either starve or sink 5K miles out, and good riddance to the lot of them. As it was, he got very lucky in finding that previously unknown set of islands when he did....
"It's unpleasantly like being drunk."
"What's so unpleasant about being drunk?"
"Ask a glass of water that sometime..."
Must have been one hell of a commute when you don't got wheels.
First off, it's in a machine room, which is expected to be noisy anyhow.
Second off, I've been between rows 3 and 4 (i.e. dead center) when it's going at full blast, and I can assure you that the Xserve/G5 fans are totally drowned out by the overhead Leibert cooling fans.
*ANY* exploit that involves the 'My Computer Zone' or similar is due to bad design. When the fundamental security design is screwed, you're stuck with either throwing it out entirely, or patching, patching, patching, patching as new ways around it are found.
Keep in mind that when TJ Watson said it, his company was *already* engaged in the sale of semi-programmable card-sorting and tabulating gear, of which they were building a LOT.
What he *meant* was "There's a market for 5 really high-end machines far and above the rest of the competition". The word "supercomputer" wouldn't be around for a few decades yet. And what do you know? Even today, there's a small handful of machines at the truly high end (currently, above 5 teraflops or so)
A horse at a full gallop is about 35-40 miles per hour, and people had been managing that for thousands of years without going insane.
Also, by the time of the Civil War, the rail speed record was already over 80mph: http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~procter/SPEED.HTM
So what you're saying is that since we sent like 50,000 troops to Afghanistan and Iraq, one person's effort was miniscule there as well.
So even if George W Bush wasn't President, we'd have invaded anyhow.
Gotcha.
Actually, the problem with being born with more instinctual knowledge is that it makes you *less* flexible. Humans take an amazingly long time to become self-sufficient because we have to learn everything, whereas most other creatures are born already knowing how to do most everything they need to know how to do.
The trade-off is that although a dog or cat is born with a lot more wired-in knowledge, it's severely restricted in what it can learn after that. Ponder the fact that literate humans are a lot more common than literate dogs or cats.....
OK... I'll bite.. How do you tell if the page actually has a link to you without trying to fetch the page and seeing if there's a link? This gets particularly interesting when you deal with content generated on the fly - there's a very good chance that my Slashdot page has links on it that aren't on yours, for instance, and which also won't be on the page your proposed automatic verifier will get if it blindly chases the Referer: URL back.