To quote "FAllen Angels" (Thanks Jerry P!) "It's all a matter of delta-v.".
Both the ISS (and currently Endeavor) are in low Earth orbit, as is the alleged satellite. Still, it ain't like you can just say "Houston, kin I borrow the keys to the shuttle tonight?". Besides, there aren't ANY gas stations up there for that baby.
I much prefer the solution that was used recently on a U.S. satellite that lost one of it's positioning motors. The engineers found that they could use an on-board electric motor to generate a magnetic field that would push against the Earth's magnetosphere....thereby turing the satellite. Bravo guys! And since it's powered by the solar cells, it'll last lot longer than the fuel supply for the original motor. Gee...we should build them ALL that way.
After all, the 1K needs only to reach a more elliptical orbit in order to start moving on out. Fire that puppy up and get it's batteries charged. Heck, considering the field strentgh needed, it would probably have to rotate and "flap" every antenna and panel it has. I can't escape the picture of that thing trying to "swim" it's way into orbit.....ah the irony...
In point of fact, I was around for the "transistion". You'll find it interesting to note that OO languages and concepts actually pre-date structured development methodologies. I attribute the current and continuing high rate of project failure to: 1). Arrogance on the part of developers / designers / architect, etc. So many people truly believe that their first idea is the only possible solution. 2). Inexperience (for which I have a great deal of patience). It takes time to learn to code well, and time to apply those lessons to the process of building strong, re-usable designs. The transistion from developer to design to architect takes years. All to often communications will break down between architects and developers over ego problems. Soft skills are as important to an architect as are design skills. 3). "The same old thing". For years my customers have recreated each other's projects, and each other's mistakes. But open communications between corporations just doesn't happen. Too many competing interests. But hey, it puts food on my table, and the smart ones hire me to train the architects, project managers, designers, coders, testers...you name, I've prob'ly trained it.
My recommendation to you (or to anyone seriously interested in learning to code well): - seek out new paradigms. An architect must borrow from many disciplines to craft an effective solution to the problem domain. You should be able to switch effectively between coding styles (and thinking styles) such as scripting (yes..monolithic, top down, fall through code), structured, OOAD, declarative (think--Prolog), and agent oriented development. - always remember that someone else, somewhere else, has probably already experienced your bright and shiny new idea. Look for those people, and understand their experience BEFORE you bring your idea to the table. -the best way to measure experience is to simply ask someone to "name the 3 things that you like least about using.... "
The electricity to your apartment is separetely metered. It's bypassing the metering (which you agree NOT to do in your service contract) that is illegal.
Are the network connections metered? Nope.
Can they be? Yep.
Why aren't they? Probably because:
1. The school doesn't have network management that is technically competent to adminster the technology they so blithely use.
2. The school would not want to incur the additional cost of maintaining user accounts at this level of detail (few IT departments do).
3. The school (like many large networks) has lost track of just the many network connections, cable runs, etc. that make up their network. Work gets done, nobody documents it. People move and others forget it was ever there.
Does the school own the network port? Yep. Are students allowed access to the network? Yep. Are students required to pay a per usage fee? Nope.
And that's where your argument falls down. I once lived in some apartments that used a shared furnace for heat (northern Illinois). Everyone's apartment drew warmth from the same network of ducts and vents.
For some reason, my bathroom lacked a vent. So, we tapped off of the vent that warmed the closet (!? go figure, my clothes stayed toasty so getting dressed was like pulling fresh clothes from the dryer each morning.).
Would you consider that to be theft of service? I had already paid for the heat, in essentially unlimited quantities, within reasonable use guidelines, with my rent. Why shouldn't I be able to direct that heat anywhere I wanted within my apartment?
There was a time when some college students were charged with theft of computer cycles, since they made unauthorized access to the university's mainframe.
The courts found that since the university login screen included phrasing similar to "Welcome to our computer, enjoy using it", that the authorization to use it was implied.
Ever notice how all login messages now say "Unauthorized use, copying, distribution, or public showing will result in FBI activity"? Or is it just my Betamax video tape?
So, these guys were authorized access, since they had an account on the network. That account was not limited in any way in terms of port, access point, machine, day/date or time. In fact, they were able to, and capable of, connecting to the network in an unrestricted manner.
Every reasonably secure system includes the capability to limit access based upon specific combinations of time and location. None of these were in place.
If you don't post a no-trespassing sign, then people can walk across your property to reach their own. They are supposed to ask permission, but they don't absolutely have to. What's most significant is that unless you provide some obstruction that INTENTIONALLY prevents unauthorized access to either property or equipment, then the authorization to use it is implied.
Want to keep people off you property? Build a fence. Don't want to build a fence? Post a sign.
Want to get people off your network? Tell them so at login.
Want to prevent people who otherwise have access from gaining access surreptitiously? Lock the account in specific ways. Easy.
But the university did none of this. Instead, they leave each student's account wide open and then beat their breasts and tear at their hair when some enterprising students take it upon themselves to SLIGHTLY improve their living conditions at their own expense.
Let me get this straight. 1. These students ran a cable from their room to a computer lab to which they NORMALLY had access and which they regularly used. 2. They connected to an active, open, unlocked and unsecured ethernet port that was not used for any other purpose, but which would have been available to them to use if they were standing in close proximity. 3. They shared their improvements with their fellow students, thus reducing the onerous difficulty of accessing network resources. 4. This effort worked to narrow the "digital divide" experienced by students of low cost housing.
When compared with more affluent students who could afford higher cost housing, the difference in network access is alarming!
And for all of this, these generous, intelligent, innovative and mildy inventive students went to jail??????????
And we have the nerve to call this theft??????
Unbelievable!
We should reward them for their community improvement efforts.
Oh. wait. let's see now.
Maybe there's something to this. After all, if other students became accustomed to convenient access to the network, then they would begin demanding it more strenuously in all low cost dorms.
Ok.
And then the school would either have to ante up, or admit to a prejudice based upon economic status. Affluent students are given the tools to improve their grades, less affluent students are forced to waste precious time simply to connect to the network.
Obviously, the cost of network access is much HIGHER than 24.00US per semester. How do you measure the lost time in travel, concentration, queuing up in line?????
For those students with tight budgetary constraints, the school in question seems determined to make it difficult for them to operate on a par with affluent students.
But hold on now. One last point.
My tax dollars help support that school (I refuse to believe that OSU receives NO federal monies.).
My investments in the private sector probably do as well, to some extent.
So, OSU.......use my tax bucks and string a few hubs and routers!
Or, if you're serious, then restrict access of all students to specific ports, (which you are able to do), and face the public outcry with your heads held high. After all, you will have shown the struggling student that is of little use to improve themselves, since they will never catch up to the levels of productivity that more wealthy students enjoy. And just to make sure, you'll throw them in jail if they try.
Where's that ACLU web site? They should read this article.
Slashdot Mirror
To quote "FAllen Angels" (Thanks Jerry P!) "It's all a matter of delta-v.".
Both the ISS (and currently Endeavor) are in low Earth orbit, as is the alleged satellite. Still, it ain't like you can just say "Houston, kin I borrow the keys to the shuttle tonight?". Besides, there aren't ANY gas stations up there for that baby.
I much prefer the solution that was used recently on a U.S. satellite that lost one of it's positioning motors. The engineers found that they could use an on-board electric motor to generate a magnetic field that would push against the Earth's magnetosphere....thereby turing the satellite. Bravo guys! And since it's powered by the solar cells, it'll last lot longer than the fuel supply for the original motor. Gee...we should build them ALL that way.
After all, the 1K needs only to reach a more elliptical orbit in order to start moving on out. Fire that puppy up and get it's batteries charged. Heck, considering the field strentgh needed, it would probably have to rotate and "flap" every antenna and panel it has. I can't escape the picture of that thing trying to "swim" it's way into orbit.....ah the irony...
eastshores, you seem to have a clue.
.... "
In point of fact, I was around for the "transistion". You'll find it interesting to note that OO languages and concepts actually pre-date structured development methodologies. I attribute the current and continuing high rate of project failure to:
1). Arrogance on the part of developers / designers / architect, etc. So many people truly believe that their first idea is the only possible solution.
2). Inexperience (for which I have a great deal of patience). It takes time to learn to code well, and time to apply those lessons to the process of building strong, re-usable designs. The transistion from developer to design to architect takes years. All to often communications will break down between architects and developers over ego problems. Soft skills are as important to an architect as are design skills.
3). "The same old thing". For years my customers have recreated each other's projects, and each other's mistakes. But open communications between corporations just doesn't happen. Too many competing interests. But hey, it puts food on my table, and the smart ones hire me to train the architects, project managers, designers, coders, testers...you name, I've prob'ly trained it.
My recommendation to you (or to anyone seriously interested in learning to code well):
- seek out new paradigms. An architect must borrow from many disciplines to craft an effective solution to the problem domain. You should be able to switch effectively between coding styles (and thinking styles) such as scripting (yes..monolithic, top down, fall through code), structured, OOAD, declarative (think--Prolog), and agent oriented development.
- always remember that someone else, somewhere else, has probably already experienced your bright and shiny new idea. Look for those people, and understand their experience BEFORE you bring your idea to the table.
-the best way to measure experience is to simply ask someone to "name the 3 things that you like least about using
Best regards!
Of course it isn't theft.
The electricity to your apartment is separetely metered. It's bypassing the metering (which you agree NOT to do in your service contract) that is illegal.
Are the network connections metered? Nope.
Can they be? Yep.
Why aren't they? Probably because:
1. The school doesn't have network management that is technically competent to adminster the technology they so blithely use.
2. The school would not want to incur the additional cost of maintaining user accounts at this level of detail (few IT departments do).
3. The school (like many large networks) has lost track of just the many network connections, cable runs, etc. that make up their network. Work gets done, nobody documents it. People move and others forget it was ever there.
Does the school own the network port? Yep.
Are students allowed access to the network? Yep.
Are students required to pay a per usage fee? Nope.
And that's where your argument falls down. I once lived in some apartments that used a shared furnace for heat (northern Illinois). Everyone's apartment drew warmth from the same network of ducts and vents.
For some reason, my bathroom lacked a vent. So, we tapped off of the vent that warmed the closet (!? go figure, my clothes stayed toasty so getting dressed was like pulling fresh clothes from the dryer each morning.).
Would you consider that to be theft of service? I had already paid for the heat, in essentially unlimited quantities, within reasonable use guidelines, with my rent. Why shouldn't I be able to direct that heat anywhere I wanted within my apartment?
There was a time when some college students were charged with theft of computer cycles, since they made unauthorized access to the university's mainframe.
The courts found that since the university login screen included phrasing similar to "Welcome to our computer, enjoy using it", that the authorization to use it was implied.
Ever notice how all login messages now say "Unauthorized use, copying, distribution, or public showing will result in FBI activity"? Or is it just my Betamax video tape?
So, these guys were authorized access, since they had an account on the network. That account was not limited in any way in terms of port, access point, machine, day/date or time. In fact, they were able to, and capable of, connecting to the network in an unrestricted manner.
Every reasonably secure system includes the capability to limit access based upon specific combinations of time and location. None of these were in place.
If you don't post a no-trespassing sign, then people can walk across your property to reach their own. They are supposed to ask permission, but they don't absolutely have to. What's most significant is that unless you provide some obstruction that INTENTIONALLY prevents unauthorized access to either property or equipment, then the authorization to use it is implied.
Want to keep people off you property? Build a fence. Don't want to build a fence? Post a sign.
Want to get people off your network? Tell them so at login.
Want to prevent people who otherwise have access from gaining access surreptitiously? Lock the account in specific ways. Easy.
But the university did none of this. Instead, they leave each student's account wide open and then beat their breasts and tear at their hair when some enterprising students take it upon themselves to SLIGHTLY improve their living conditions at their own expense.
Let me get this straight.
1. These students ran a cable from their room to a computer lab to which they NORMALLY had access and which they regularly used.
2. They connected to an active, open, unlocked and unsecured ethernet port that was not used for any other purpose, but which would have been available to them to use if they were standing in close proximity.
3. They shared their improvements with their fellow students, thus reducing the onerous difficulty of accessing network resources.
4. This effort worked to narrow the "digital divide" experienced by students of low cost housing.
When compared with more affluent students who could afford higher cost housing, the difference in network access is alarming!
And for all of this, these generous, intelligent, innovative and mildy inventive students went to jail??????????
And we have the nerve to call this theft??????
Unbelievable!
We should reward them for their community improvement efforts.
Oh. wait. let's see now.
Maybe there's something to this. After all, if other students became accustomed to convenient access to the network, then they would begin demanding it more strenuously in all low cost dorms.
Ok.
And then the school would either have to ante up, or admit to a prejudice based upon economic status. Affluent students are given the tools to improve their grades, less affluent students are forced to waste precious time simply to connect to the network.
Obviously, the cost of network access is much HIGHER than 24.00US per semester. How do you measure the lost time in travel, concentration, queuing up in line?????
For those students with tight budgetary constraints, the school in question seems determined to make it difficult for them to operate on a par with affluent students.
But hold on now. One last point.
My tax dollars help support that school (I refuse to believe that OSU receives NO federal monies.).
My investments in the private sector probably do as well, to some extent.
So, OSU.......use my tax bucks and string a few hubs and routers!
Or, if you're serious, then restrict access of all students to specific ports, (which you are able to do), and face the public outcry with your heads held high. After all, you will have shown the struggling student that is of little use to improve themselves, since they will never catch up to the levels of productivity that more wealthy students enjoy. And just to make sure, you'll throw them in jail if they try.
Where's that ACLU web site? They should read this article.
whew,
theBitBucket.