I migrated from the LA to London 2 1/2 years ago under the Highly Skilled Migrant Programme, which, if you qualify, is a very good way to enter the job market in the UK. You earn points based on your education level, number of years graduate (post university) working experience, salary, and other factors (bonus points for being young, an MD, or MBA from a top 50 school).
Once you get it, you can enter the UK without a job, look for a job for up to a year and switch employers at any time. Work permits are also possible but are much more restrictive since you need employer sponsorship, they need to "prove" that no one local could have done the job and to change employers requires a new work permit.
There are a number of good IT job sites in the uk (http://jobserve.com, http://monster.co.uk/http://jobsite.co.uk/http://progressive.co.uk/ etc...). I applied to many and got very few responses until I put down a friend's address and phone number in England. I was then able to get some telephone interviews, but didn't get a final job offer until after I moved over. Even though I was fortunate to get a job offer relatively quickly, I didn't start work for almost a month and a half, and didn't get paid for over 2 months (salaried payment in the UK is almost always monthly, often in arrears, which takes a bit to get used to). Contract work is also an option.
A very good website for the HSMP and UK immigration in general is http://www.immigrationboards.com/ a free discussion board, part of http://www.workpermit.com/ a worldwide immigration service (which I didn't use but might be an option for you).
I've found "What's the problem we need to solve?" gets to the same information as "What are you really trying to do?" and is less likely to put the requestor on the defensive.... but either is better than what one is likely to be thinking at that moment;-)
Password protected zip, PGP etc are all well established valid ways of sending viruses samples for legitimate research since virus filters can't decrypt payloads. Viruses can certainly use encryption but they either remain detectable due to other aspects of the packaging or require sufficient effort on the receiving end to decrypt and execute that they don't spread quickly.
If end to end encryption in email or IP is ever widely adopted we can expect viruses, especially email viruses, to be much more difficult to detect in transit.
The average spammer uses a proggie to send hundreds of spam e-mails every hour, so why don't they just monitor the SMTP transfers per hour and then draw their own conclusions?
Let me preface this by saying that while I am an Earthlink employee, the following is a personal opinion:
The matter of port 25 blocking is disconcerting to me as a proponent of a free internet. However, spam generated by Earthlink customers dramatically affects other ISPs. There is a reason that if you look on Maps.vix.com, Earthlink's notes say something like "Formerly a prodigious source of spam."
First of all, understand that the semantics of email are seemingly designed for DOS attacks. What other protocol is designed to allow a single message to be replicated many times by an intermediate server at no cost to the originating host. Left unchecked, spam is so bad that you would never get any mail. So we fight a vailiant battle at ISPs to keep our customers free while keeping the services they depend on running at a reasonable cost. At Earthlink we have no fewer than 4 separate independent spam managament tools that I can think of off hand.
Every day I see the effects of being on the receiving end of networks which don't block port 25. While it would be eminently preferable to use traffic shaping at the router, rather than outright blocks, the protocol analysis required to identify and block spam is very involved and to the best of my knowledge can't be done at the router level except in very crude ways. For instance you can't simply monitor bytes sent, because a single message may have many recipients so the size multiplies. You can't measure connections since one SMTP connection can have multiple messages sent in it. Even at the application level it is difficult.
Tell me of a better way and we will will most likely use it. I would like nothing better than to keep the internet as unfettered as possible. --
I can assure you that the system administrators at Earthlink are extremely concientious and try to err on the side of permissivity when trying to strike a balance between keeping our head above the spam and letting legitimate mail through. It is an extremely difficult task and we are fallible. It is clear however, that we can't afford to be hands off, nor can the rest of the net. --
As a system administrator at Earthlink, I am interested in looking into the problem you describe. Without more information I can't say definitively whether it is due to Pac Bell, us, or you. Please send details of you investigation to the above address.
Note that this is primarily for personal interest. I may or may not be able to diagnose the problem. --
The author implies that Above.net is using the RBL to block HTTP access to websites. This is quite troubling if true.
It seems much more likely that Above.net and various other ISPs and users are using the RBL to block email from the IPs in question (which would be likely to be used by the website, but might not be). This is also troubling if innocent machines are implicated but much less so and hardly rises to the level of censorware since websites do not typically use email for only a tiny fraction of their content. --
The best advice I can give is to get a good lawyer from the start. Although I consider myself intelligent, I messed up in some of the initial filing without a lawyer and it cost big in time and money. If you are concerned about the cost of a lawyer, consider this, we have spent over $1000 in filing fees, over 100 hours standing in line at the Los Angeles Federal building, and 9 months with my wife being not able to work and 2 1/2 years waiting for her green card. I would say that conservatively the ordeal has had an opportunity cost of over $20000. A good lawyer is cheap by comparison and can significantly speed up the process of initial filing.
That being said, working outside the country with the state department does 3 things for you. It gets you an interview much sooner (this is the longest 2 years of the wait in our case), it means that your wife can get a working and travelling visa before she enters the US. It is impossible to travel if your visa lapses during the process of applying for a green card, even if it is the INS's fault. Finally the state department is designed to help American citizens and is extremely pleasant compared to dealing directly with the INS.
I'd be glad to put you in touch with my sister who went through the state department procedure. Email me at the address above. --
The easiest way to get a green card is to marry a US citizen. This is well known, even cliche. What is not well known is that processing a change of status to permanent resident while living in the US takes an obscene amount of time. My wife is a Chilean citizen, and she has been waiting over 2 1/2 years for a green card interview, with no end in sight. During that time she can work, but not leave the US even to visit a sick relative.
As far as I can tell this is due to the fact that the INS deals mostly with non-citizens so no one with voting power cares about the efficiency of service. One would think that efficiently processing those who can stay and efficiently deporting those who can not would benefit both sides, but this is not the way things work. The INS is by far the most inefficient government agency in the US.
If however, you marry a US citizen outside the US, the initial stages are handled through the US State Department and the process can be quite swift. ~6 mo rather than ~3 years. --
As I understand it, the IOC is essentially a autocracy controlled by Juan Antonio Samaranch who has been president for over 20 years IIRC. He lives in a $500,000 a year hotel suite in Geneva paid for by the IOC and did nothing about the corruption in the IOC even though by his own admission he knew of problems dating back to 1984. (He did nothing because no one came forward with names!)
He did not resign after the latest scandals although many believe he should have. He has not been directly implicated in any corruption scandal...yet. --
Carnivore does what no 3rd party private company can do, put an unreviewed, secret source, remotely administered, low level packet sniffer in the heart of the data center of every major ISP.
Granted, email is not particularily secure, since any computer on an network in the path can read it in a similar manner to what Carnivore does. But Carnivore is a terrible precedent since it means that the Government has a _right_ to read our mail, which it can take all necessary means to enforce even when it is no longer technologically sensible.
I can easily envision a future where email is seamlessly encrypted but To and From is recorded for all emails and anybody can be forced to hand over encyption keys given any hint of suspicion of criminal activity (like recieving an email from someone who received email from a person under investigation).
As you say, the only solution is end to end, but that means really end to end, i.e. no ISP mail servers. Even then it is hard to see how we can technologically prevent the government from monitoring traffic patterns.
As far as HTTPS goes, since RSA is expiring soon, SSL can be much more widely deployed, but SSL certificates are per IP so they can't be used on IP sharing virtual servers which are most common. --
Any IP request has an IP address (32 bits) which uniquely identifies a network device and a port number (16 bits) Which uniquely identifies a service. So there are 4 billion x 65 thousand = a lot of possiblilities.
You can use the port number to route to different servers as you suggest but since certain port numbers are associated with certain services HTTP=80, FTP=21, Telnet=23 etc, you only get granularity on the order of services at the IP level. Some protocols, such as HTTP, have the client send the DNS name of the host it requests which then allows you to virtualize based on the (effectively infinite) DNS namespace. To do more than this requires client cooperation such as requesting an HTTP session on an alternate port. But this is impossible in the world of firewalls where it is quite common for only port 80 connections to be allowed.
There are other problems with the current form of IP addresses such as the difficulty of making a routing table since adjacent IP addresses may be in completely different geographical locations.
IPv6 is the solution and it contains the concept of global and local portions of the IP address similar to what you proposed as well as a mindbogglingly big address space (128 bits) and other features. Search Google for more info. --
We don't know exactly how prehistoric tools were made or how large monuments (pyramids, stonehenge, Easter Island statues) were constructed. However we can do the equivalent thing today with modern methods. In 50000 years it might be easiest to read a CD by taking a picture of it with an ultra high resolution digital camera and having pattern recognition AI do the rest. --
The fact of the matter is the 90's saw dramatic sustained productivity growth in the US, which is one of the major factors which allowed economic growth without inflation. This productivity growth still continues.
So there is not paradox, the investments in technology and changes in corporate structures (including massive layoffs) simply took longer to effect a change than some expected. --
Slashdot Mirror
I migrated from the LA to London 2 1/2 years ago under the Highly Skilled Migrant Programme, which, if you qualify, is a very good way to enter the job market in the UK. You earn points based on your education level, number of years graduate (post university) working experience, salary, and other factors (bonus points for being young, an MD, or MBA from a top 50 school).
Once you get it, you can enter the UK without a job, look for a job for up to a year and switch employers at any time. Work permits are also possible but are much more restrictive since you need employer sponsorship, they need to "prove" that no one local could have done the job and to change employers requires a new work permit.
There are a number of good IT job sites in the uk (http://jobserve.com, http://monster.co.uk/ http://jobsite.co.uk/ http://progressive.co.uk/ etc...). I applied to many and got very few responses until I put down a friend's address and phone number in England. I was then able to get some telephone interviews, but didn't get a final job offer until after I moved over. Even though I was fortunate to get a job offer relatively quickly, I didn't start work for almost a month and a half, and didn't get paid for over 2 months (salaried payment in the UK is almost always monthly, often in arrears, which takes a bit to get used to). Contract work is also an option.
A very good website for the HSMP and UK immigration in general is http://www.immigrationboards.com/ a free discussion board, part of http://www.workpermit.com/ a worldwide immigration service (which I didn't use but might be an option for you).
Best of luck!
You get a tax credit for any tax paid to a foreign government, and a $80,000 exclusion before you pay any US tax on foreign income.
This means that if you are working in a higher tax country, you don't end up paying any tax to the US government.
I've found "What's the problem we need to solve?" gets to the same information as "What are you really trying to do?" and is less likely to put the requestor on the defensive.... but either is better than what one is likely to be thinking at that moment ;-)
Password protected zip, PGP etc are all well established valid ways of sending viruses samples for legitimate research since virus filters can't decrypt payloads. Viruses can certainly use encryption but they either remain detectable due to other aspects of the packaging or require sufficient effort on the receiving end to decrypt and execute that they don't spread quickly.
If end to end encryption in email or IP is ever widely adopted we can expect viruses, especially email viruses, to be much more difficult to detect in transit.
The average spammer uses a proggie to send hundreds of spam e-mails every hour, so why don't they just monitor the SMTP transfers per hour and then draw their own conclusions?
Let me preface this by saying that while I am an Earthlink employee, the following is a personal opinion:
The matter of port 25 blocking is disconcerting to me as a proponent of a free internet. However, spam generated by Earthlink customers dramatically affects other ISPs. There is a reason that if you look on Maps.vix.com, Earthlink's notes say something like "Formerly a prodigious source of spam."
First of all, understand that the semantics of email are seemingly designed for DOS attacks. What other protocol is designed to allow a single message to be replicated many times by an intermediate server at no cost to the originating host. Left unchecked, spam is so bad that you would never get any mail. So we fight a vailiant battle at ISPs to keep our customers free while keeping the services they depend on running at a reasonable cost. At Earthlink we have no fewer than 4 separate independent spam managament tools that I can think of off hand.
Every day I see the effects of being on the receiving end of networks which don't block port 25. While it would be eminently preferable to use traffic shaping at the router, rather than outright blocks, the protocol analysis required to identify and block spam is very involved and to the best of my knowledge can't be done at the router level except in very crude ways. For instance you can't simply monitor bytes sent, because a single message may have many recipients so the size multiplies. You can't measure connections since one SMTP connection can have multiple messages sent in it. Even at the application level it is difficult.
Tell me of a better way and we will will most likely use it. I would like nothing better than to keep the internet as unfettered as possible.
--
I'd be interested in hearing the details on this. Email me if you care to.
--
I can assure you that the system administrators at Earthlink are extremely concientious and try to err on the side of permissivity when trying to strike a balance between keeping our head above the spam and letting legitimate mail through. It is an extremely difficult task and we are fallible. It is clear however, that we can't afford to be hands off, nor can the rest of the net.
--
As a system administrator at Earthlink, I am interested in looking into the problem you describe. Without more information I can't say definitively whether it is due to Pac Bell, us, or you. Please send details of you investigation to the above address.
Note that this is primarily for personal interest. I may or may not be able to diagnose the problem.
--
The author implies that Above.net is using the RBL to block HTTP access to websites. This is quite troubling if true.
It seems much more likely that Above.net and various other ISPs and users are using the RBL to block email from the IPs in question (which would be likely to be used by the website, but might not be). This is also troubling if innocent machines are implicated but much less so and hardly rises to the level of censorware since websites do not typically use email for only a tiny fraction of their content.
--
The best advice I can give is to get a good lawyer from the start. Although I consider myself intelligent, I messed up in some of the initial filing without a lawyer and it cost big in time and money. If you are concerned about the cost of a lawyer, consider this, we have spent over $1000 in filing fees, over 100 hours standing in line at the Los Angeles Federal building, and 9 months with my wife being not able to work and 2 1/2 years waiting for her green card. I would say that conservatively the ordeal has had an opportunity cost of over $20000. A good lawyer is cheap by comparison and can significantly speed up the process of initial filing.
That being said, working outside the country with the state department does 3 things for you. It gets you an interview much sooner (this is the longest 2 years of the wait in our case), it means that your wife can get a working and travelling visa before she enters the US. It is impossible to travel if your visa lapses during the process of applying for a green card, even if it is the INS's fault. Finally the state department is designed to help American citizens and is extremely pleasant compared to dealing directly with the INS.
I'd be glad to put you in touch with my sister who went through the state department procedure. Email me at the address above.
--
The easiest way to get a green card is to marry a US citizen. This is well known, even cliche. What is not well known is that processing a change of status to permanent resident while living in the US takes an obscene amount of time. My wife is a Chilean citizen, and she has been waiting over 2 1/2 years for a green card interview, with no end in sight. During that time she can work, but not leave the US even to visit a sick relative.
As far as I can tell this is due to the fact that the INS deals mostly with non-citizens so no one with voting power cares about the efficiency of service. One would think that efficiently processing those who can stay and efficiently deporting those who can not would benefit both sides, but this is not the way things work. The INS is by far the most inefficient government agency in the US.
If however, you marry a US citizen outside the US, the initial stages are handled through the US State Department and the process can be quite swift. ~6 mo rather than ~3 years.
--
As I understand it, the IOC is essentially a autocracy controlled by Juan Antonio Samaranch who has been president for over 20 years IIRC. He lives in a $500,000 a year hotel suite in Geneva paid for by the IOC and did nothing about the corruption in the IOC even though by his own admission he knew of problems dating back to 1984. (He did nothing because no one came forward with names!)
He did not resign after the latest scandals although many believe he should have. He has not been directly implicated in any corruption scandal...yet.
--
You're allowed to wear the tee-shirt, just not read it.
--
It's more forceful as
I think it would be a good idea (the original form when he was asked about Western Civilization).
--
Carnivore does what no 3rd party private company can do, put an unreviewed, secret source, remotely administered, low level packet sniffer in the heart of the data center of every major ISP.
Granted, email is not particularily secure, since any computer on an network in the path can read it in a similar manner to what Carnivore does. But Carnivore is a terrible precedent since it means that the Government has a _right_ to read our mail, which it can take all necessary means to enforce even when it is no longer technologically sensible.
I can easily envision a future where email is seamlessly encrypted but To and From is recorded for all emails and anybody can be forced to hand over encyption keys given any hint of suspicion of criminal activity (like recieving an email from someone who received email from a person under investigation).
As you say, the only solution is end to end, but that means really end to end, i.e. no ISP mail servers. Even then it is hard to see how we can technologically prevent the government from monitoring traffic patterns.
As far as HTTPS goes, since RSA is expiring soon, SSL can be much more widely deployed, but SSL certificates are per IP so they can't be used on IP sharing virtual servers which are most common.
--
It's sort of like that already.
Any IP request has an IP address (32 bits) which uniquely identifies a network device and a port number (16 bits) Which uniquely identifies a service. So there are 4 billion x 65 thousand = a lot of possiblilities.
You can use the port number to route to different servers as you suggest but since certain port numbers are associated with certain services HTTP=80, FTP=21, Telnet=23 etc, you only get granularity on the order of services at the IP level. Some protocols, such as HTTP, have the client send the DNS name of the host it requests which then allows you to virtualize based on the (effectively infinite) DNS namespace. To do more than this requires client cooperation such as requesting an HTTP session on an alternate port. But this is impossible in the world of firewalls where it is quite common for only port 80 connections to be allowed.
There are other problems with the current form of IP addresses such as the difficulty of making a routing table since adjacent IP addresses may be in completely different geographical locations.
IPv6 is the solution and it contains the concept of global and local portions of the IP address similar to what you proposed as well as a mindbogglingly big address space (128 bits) and other features. Search Google for more info.
--
#!/usr/local/bin/perl -wT
use CGI qw/:standard/;
use CGI::Carp;
if(defined url_param('action')){
for (url_param('action')) {
if (/respond/) { beep(2); }
elsif {/move/} { wobble;
beep(1};
whirr(2);
move(url_param('direction'));
}
elsif {/trapped/} { hack('imperial_comp');
beep(2);
}
else { #default
random_beep();
}
}
}
--
We don't know exactly how prehistoric tools were made or how large monuments (pyramids, stonehenge, Easter Island statues) were constructed. However we can do the equivalent thing today with modern methods. In 50000 years it might be easiest to read a CD by taking a picture of it with an ultra high resolution digital camera and having pattern recognition AI do the rest.
--
Write your message in COBOL.
--
Intarantellent
--
The fact of the matter is the 90's saw dramatic sustained productivity growth in the US, which is one of the major factors which allowed economic growth without inflation. This productivity growth still continues.
So there is not paradox, the investments in technology and changes in corporate structures (including massive layoffs) simply took longer to effect a change than some expected.
--
At least he didn't say 'grok';
--
Any OS worth it's salt will zero out (or otherwise erase) memory it hands to a user to prevent security problems.
--
If you know what you are doing, though, you can get under the hood and get your hands dirty.
And my uncle who runs a donkey farm says the thing really hauls ass.
ducks and runs for cover
--
sorry that should obviously be
while(<>)
--