A field archaeologist might find them self working on a Viking dig one project and a WW1 project the next. Are they supposed to change job title simply because the period they're working on has changed?
Then their job has expanded such that "archeology" is no longer an adequate description.
They are field excavators.... or perhaps we could say Artifactologists
People probably do rarely use the start button, most of the time what they want most of the time will be found on the desktop and/or quick launch without them even having to do anything
Yes... well, I suppose their looking at numbers and finding people not using the start menu at all may be interesting but biased.
I use the start menu a lot but disabled any customer experience improvement program usage, because I don't necessarily trust MS.
Maybe what their numbers really show is just people who don't know how to turn off the CEIP program reporting, tend to be people that don't know how to use menus
The amount of emissions might be similar... I would expect the composition of those emissions to be considerably different.
How many plastics would there be getting cooked on a gas or electric stove, or in a scented candle? Probably not very many...
Instead of sitting on their ass throwing stuff at the wall and seeing what sticks like changing the UI in Vista and again in Windows 8 for now good reason, they should of taken a cue from Apple who built and _expanded_ upon a good foundation
They're not just throwing stuff and seeing what sticks; it's more insidious than that --- back when they explained the reason for removing the start menu -- they were showing data using the customer improvement program; about how the start menu is rarely ever used.
In other words.... they are using some strange "data driven approach" to decide how to change their UI designs; but in some manner, the data they are relying on has flaws, and probably the data doesn't say what they think it does, or what someone has a strong conviction is the proper interpretation (even though it's wrong).
Somewhere it helps to be ahead of the curve and not chronically behind it. Listening is good, yes, but who was Apple listening to when they created the iPhone?
Creating new products on your own without having your users to ask for everything is great -- ultimately, they won't know if they like it until they can get an opportunity to use it a while and see if it helps them be more efficient or makes life easier for them.
A product that has enormous benefits for you, can still make you feel very uncomfortable or annoyed at first, before you have gotten used to it:
change is hard.
Apple had an advantage with the iPhone. Noone had ever used a touch screen smart phone before, so people had no established patterns; Apple as first creator could essentially define how people do things on the platform. Once people are used to those ways change is harder and likely to be resisted.
Apple has made no fundamental changes to the iPhone, since the 3GS.
Yes, they made a few incremental improvements here and there --- notification center, multitasking, push notifications; lock screen changes; stacks of apps.
However, they've made no major user interface changes -- if you were familiar with the iPhone 3GS; you will be pretty darned comfortable with the iPhone 5 and beyond, because there's no major changes to the way you work.
I dare say the number of "controversial" changes were relatively small on the face of it --- things like replacing the Google Maps app.... Yes virginia, you do have to get your maps from a different place now, and it kind of sucks, but noone's switching platforms over something so minor as that.
On the other hand.... Metro isn't minor. It's not minor not because it can't be minor, but Microsoft has chosen to present Metro in such a way that there is no way to circumvent it --- the difference is a major impact, and likely to move users to different platforms; That is, if those other platforms provide a more true traditional Windows experience than Windows 8 does.
If Microsoft wants to dabble in completely new OSes, that's great, as long as they keep providing upgrades and support for businesses using their most popular products, so that they are not forced to switch platforms.
That's not how Microsoft's treating Metro; it's "The next version of Windows", that you have to move to, whether you like to or not, because we're not going to be selling Windows 7 anymore, or providing updates anything like it.
How much is a Windows 8 exploit worth these days on the open market, something like $250,000?
Microsoft requires more than a mere exploit for that; you need to defeat Windows 8 security mitigations
and provide a whitepaper for even more $$$; on the open market, that's probably worth half a million,
to defeat all the security mitigations MS has provided; which essentially means an infection using
the exploit could become unstoppable
Malice is not firing a shotgun at a beer can because you want to see it "Blowed Up!" and not giving a fuck about the 3 people standing behind the beer can.
Negligence/wreckless endangerment of a certain calibre rises to the level of malice, when the lowest-calibre reasonable person under those circumstances would immediately understand how wantonly dangerous and foolhardy the behavior was to other people.
In other words; it's still a crime the shotgun holder would be guilty of, OR a crime they would be innocent of by reason of insanity.
Google may provide a group policy option to disable the chromoting function....
But who is to say an attacker or misbehaving user doesn't later find a bug to turn it back on
or circumvent the disablement?
Aaron Swartz hacks for the dissemination of information. Gets browbeaten and threatned with so much time he kills himself. This guy hack for only his own good and gets a year. Nice to know where our prosecutors priorities are.
Wait... Aaron Swartz didn't hack at all. He had privileges (JSTOR account) that allowed him to access the information he did; his crime was an "abuse" in the form of "overuse"; as in, he downloaded a "large number of articles"; instead of a small number of articles he was intended to be downloading.
No doubt he was prosecuted based on a corporate agenda of controlling information.
There was no corporate hand, or 'billions$ in intellectual property at stake' in the California case, though
there were officials sitting and watching the electronic tally in real time, with the IP addresses attached even, and they were able to spot it and track the IP to the physical location and get there before he was done.
Sometimes IT admins have little better to do, and they understand about students abusing resources... they may have been watching for security reasons and noticed something anomolous; suddenly a massive amount of activity from one IP that just happened to be an on-campus IP.
The cl00bie trying to rig the election; apparently never heard of using something like Tor, VPN, or open proxy services.
There are probably plenty of California-based services they could have used to distribute traffic over multiple IPs; which would have made it less obvious -- or at least make the identity of the bad actor unobvious.
What's sad is the guy probably ruined his entire future career over some stupid shit.... what employer will want to hire the college guy who committed a felony in college?
Folks, please leave the hacking and other crimes to the expert script kiddies who live in Russia and China, where they are able to pursue those activities with impunity ---- those jobs are not for Americans; you're supposed to be honest, and work normal jobs -- like teacher or lawyer.
This position had a large stipend attached. $8000 is a lot for a student. I don't know why the summaries never mention this. I guess it makes for more controversy when it is fraud for something rather meaningless rather than plain old fraud for cash.
It sounds like a heck of a lot of money to me too; and i'm a pro software engineer, not a student.
However; I don't live in California. After factoring in cost of living, the stipend paid to someone living in Long beach CA is probably equivalent to what would be around $2000 in most of the US.
Any terrorist can realize that a security line (which gets huge during busy season) is as good of a place as any to detonate a bomb. No security _before_ the checkpoint.
Protecting you while you're waiting to enter the secure area is not their job --- their job is to prevent weapons from coming onboard, or people getting into the security area with contraband.
You don't do contingency planning to plan for likely events -- some of the real risks are the things that "never" happen, so you don't know how likely they are, which happen more often than you would like to think - are the reason for DR planning.
Remember the Chicago CO fire in 1988?
That incurred massive telephone service outages.
It's also possible some 128 count fiber gets cut by some errant backhoe, and makes internet in an area unavailable.
Providers often maintain protected paths ---- over time, their transport redundancy often eventually gets inadvertently groomed so the redundant link goes over the same physical cable; the ISPs often don't have a clue they aren't redundant anymore - or their two upstream ISPs or their providers have physical infrastructure in common (available single points of failure).
There's no question that many ISPs that could on the surface appear to be unrelated, separate, and independent; in an area, often in effect share subtle points of failure with each other, so that all ISPs could be caused to fail simultaneously by certain shared pieces failing (whether the ISPs actually know those pieces are shared or not).
Chances are much higher, that the ISPs in your employees homes are much more diverse and it would take a much larger outage to take down ALL of the ISPs your people subscribed to, than it takes to take out those 2 that connect your datacenter.
Residential connections will generally fall into two categories: (1) DSL, and (2) Cable.
This is typically the local ILEC providing DSL to 99% of the people, and a local cable company with a franchising agreement in the locality providing the cable plant.
Chances are your office falls into one of those categories too, although some offices may have something more complicated like an expensive bonded setup or MetroE technology.
If there's any huge diversity in employees' network connectivity from L2 to L4: it must be that many employees live in different cities far enough away to be fed by different telco central offices.
Not in years. I used to work as a sys admin for HP, and they used to cover this, but then when times got a little tight they said, essentially "you all have internet anyway, so we're not paying for it anymore".
At which point, you tell them that they can no longer expect you checking your e-mail from home or doing anything like that, because you don't have a company sanctioned network connection.
Warm water can have a non-trivial environmental impact but newer plants can reduce this to trivial by having a lot of small outlets instead of one large one.
They can construct an artificial body of water, and mix the output water with fresh water, before releasing it back into the sea.
They should follow the approach Google is using in some datacenters, and use the recycled/treated gray water for the power plant.
The power plants need not take in potable water; they could largely take in the sewer water,
before using it to cool the plant, treat it a bit further, and then dump that back out into the rivers....
When your complete IT is based on SaaS, just send everyone home and let them work from home. All the tools they need are "in the cloud"
That requires prior planning, and probably requires you to pay for your workers' internet connections or reimburse some portion of their fees.... Your workers might not otherwise have the appropriate connectivity to do this.
It also won't work, if the network affecting issue also takes out your workers' home connectivity and effects multiple ISPs in the area -- the issue may be more widespread than the business' link.
Your CRM being SaaS does no good; if your CSR doesn't have an office at home, and a POTS line that you can redirect customer calls to.
Moving to the cloud doesn't solve this, per se, if you move all your infrastructure to say Amazon you're still beholden to that company and its internal procedures. A system administration on their part could easily render you down for many hours.
A data loss on their part could render you down permanently; Do you have a SLA? Do you have proof that your cloud vendors have DR solutions?
What is your action plan if your leased-line WAN goes down, and your internet service provider tells you that it will be 48 to 72 hours to resolve? May be a fiber cut, or worse. Drunk drivers can take down networks and POPs too.
Slashdot Mirror
A field archaeologist might find them self working on a Viking dig one project and a WW1 project the next. Are they supposed to change job title simply because the period they're working on has changed?
Then their job has expanded such that "archeology" is no longer an adequate description. They are field excavators.... or perhaps we could say Artifactologists
Or Forensic History Investigators
People probably do rarely use the start button, most of the time what they want most of the time will be found on the desktop and/or quick launch without them even having to do anything
Yes... well, I suppose their looking at numbers and finding people not using the start menu at all may be interesting but biased. I use the start menu a lot but disabled any customer experience improvement program usage, because I don't necessarily trust MS.
Maybe what their numbers really show is just people who don't know how to turn off the CEIP program reporting, tend to be people that don't know how to use menus
The amount of emissions might be similar... I would expect the composition of those emissions to be considerably different. How many plastics would there be getting cooked on a gas or electric stove, or in a scented candle? Probably not very many...
Instead of sitting on their ass throwing stuff at the wall and seeing what sticks like changing the UI in Vista and again in Windows 8 for now good reason, they should of taken a cue from Apple who built and _expanded_ upon a good foundation
They're not just throwing stuff and seeing what sticks; it's more insidious than that --- back when they explained the reason for removing the start menu -- they were showing data using the customer improvement program; about how the start menu is rarely ever used.
In other words.... they are using some strange "data driven approach" to decide how to change their UI designs; but in some manner, the data they are relying on has flaws, and probably the data doesn't say what they think it does, or what someone has a strong conviction is the proper interpretation (even though it's wrong).
Somewhere it helps to be ahead of the curve and not chronically behind it. Listening is good, yes, but who was Apple listening to when they created the iPhone?
Creating new products on your own without having your users to ask for everything is great -- ultimately, they won't know if they like it until they can get an opportunity to use it a while and see if it helps them be more efficient or makes life easier for them. A product that has enormous benefits for you, can still make you feel very uncomfortable or annoyed at first, before you have gotten used to it: change is hard.
Apple had an advantage with the iPhone. Noone had ever used a touch screen smart phone before, so people had no established patterns; Apple as first creator could essentially define how people do things on the platform. Once people are used to those ways change is harder and likely to be resisted.
Apple has made no fundamental changes to the iPhone, since the 3GS. Yes, they made a few incremental improvements here and there --- notification center, multitasking, push notifications; lock screen changes; stacks of apps.
However, they've made no major user interface changes -- if you were familiar with the iPhone 3GS; you will be pretty darned comfortable with the iPhone 5 and beyond, because there's no major changes to the way you work.
I dare say the number of "controversial" changes were relatively small on the face of it --- things like replacing the Google Maps app.... Yes virginia, you do have to get your maps from a different place now, and it kind of sucks, but noone's switching platforms over something so minor as that.
On the other hand.... Metro isn't minor. It's not minor not because it can't be minor, but Microsoft has chosen to present Metro in such a way that there is no way to circumvent it --- the difference is a major impact, and likely to move users to different platforms; That is, if those other platforms provide a more true traditional Windows experience than Windows 8 does.
If Microsoft wants to dabble in completely new OSes, that's great, as long as they keep providing upgrades and support for businesses using their most popular products, so that they are not forced to switch platforms.
That's not how Microsoft's treating Metro; it's "The next version of Windows", that you have to move to, whether you like to or not, because we're not going to be selling Windows 7 anymore, or providing updates anything like it.
How much is a Windows 8 exploit worth these days on the open market, something like $250,000?
Microsoft requires more than a mere exploit for that; you need to defeat Windows 8 security mitigations and provide a whitepaper for even more $$$; on the open market, that's probably worth half a million, to defeat all the security mitigations MS has provided; which essentially means an infection using the exploit could become unstoppable
Malice is not firing a shotgun at a beer can because you want to see it "Blowed Up!" and not giving a fuck about the 3 people standing behind the beer can.
Negligence/wreckless endangerment of a certain calibre rises to the level of malice, when the lowest-calibre reasonable person under those circumstances would immediately understand how wantonly dangerous and foolhardy the behavior was to other people.
In other words; it's still a crime the shotgun holder would be guilty of, OR a crime they would be innocent of by reason of insanity.
If I attempt to shoot my ex girlfriend with a rifle, that is also malice.
On the other hand... an observer would have no way of knowing that the attempt was malicious.
As in you could later claim to have mistaken the girlfriend for an intruder; she grabbed a flashlight, and you thought she was pulling out a gun.
There are countless explanations for AT&T's practices that have nothing to do with malice.
And one could argue it can be maliciously negligent to assume malice, when there are alternative explanations.
Google may provide a group policy option to disable the chromoting function.... But who is to say an attacker or misbehaving user doesn't later find a bug to turn it back on or circumvent the disablement?
Aaron Swartz hacks for the dissemination of information. Gets browbeaten and threatned with so much time he kills himself. This guy hack for only his own good and gets a year. Nice to know where our prosecutors priorities are.
Wait... Aaron Swartz didn't hack at all. He had privileges (JSTOR account) that allowed him to access the information he did; his crime was an "abuse" in the form of "overuse"; as in, he downloaded a "large number of articles"; instead of a small number of articles he was intended to be downloading.
No doubt he was prosecuted based on a corporate agenda of controlling information. There was no corporate hand, or 'billions$ in intellectual property at stake' in the California case, though
there were officials sitting and watching the electronic tally in real time, with the IP addresses attached even, and they were able to spot it and track the IP to the physical location and get there before he was done.
Sometimes IT admins have little better to do, and they understand about students abusing resources... they may have been watching for security reasons and noticed something anomolous; suddenly a massive amount of activity from one IP that just happened to be an on-campus IP.
The cl00bie trying to rig the election; apparently never heard of using something like Tor, VPN, or open proxy services.
There are probably plenty of California-based services they could have used to distribute traffic over multiple IPs; which would have made it less obvious -- or at least make the identity of the bad actor unobvious.
What's sad is the guy probably ruined his entire future career over some stupid shit.... what employer will want to hire the college guy who committed a felony in college?
Folks, please leave the hacking and other crimes to the expert script kiddies who live in Russia and China, where they are able to pursue those activities with impunity ---- those jobs are not for Americans; you're supposed to be honest, and work normal jobs -- like teacher or lawyer.
What, like this?
This position had a large stipend attached. $8000 is a lot for a student. I don't know why the summaries never mention this. I guess it makes for more controversy when it is fraud for something rather meaningless rather than plain old fraud for cash.
It sounds like a heck of a lot of money to me too; and i'm a pro software engineer, not a student.
However; I don't live in California. After factoring in cost of living, the stipend paid to someone living in Long beach CA is probably equivalent to what would be around $2000 in most of the US.
Any terrorist can realize that a security line (which gets huge during busy season) is as good of a place as any to detonate a bomb. No security _before_ the checkpoint.
Protecting you while you're waiting to enter the secure area is not their job --- their job is to prevent weapons from coming onboard, or people getting into the security area with contraband.
You don't do contingency planning to plan for likely events -- some of the real risks are the things that "never" happen, so you don't know how likely they are, which happen more often than you would like to think - are the reason for DR planning.
Remember the Chicago CO fire in 1988? That incurred massive telephone service outages.
It's also possible some 128 count fiber gets cut by some errant backhoe, and makes internet in an area unavailable.
Providers often maintain protected paths ---- over time, their transport redundancy often eventually gets inadvertently groomed so the redundant link goes over the same physical cable; the ISPs often don't have a clue they aren't redundant anymore - or their two upstream ISPs or their providers have physical infrastructure in common (available single points of failure).
There's no question that many ISPs that could on the surface appear to be unrelated, separate, and independent; in an area, often in effect share subtle points of failure with each other, so that all ISPs could be caused to fail simultaneously by certain shared pieces failing (whether the ISPs actually know those pieces are shared or not).
You can only rig real elections and get away with it; not campus elections.
Because a campus is so small, and everyone knows if you cheat a little.
Chances are much higher, that the ISPs in your employees homes are much more diverse and it would take a much larger outage to take down ALL of the ISPs your people subscribed to, than it takes to take out those 2 that connect your datacenter.
Residential connections will generally fall into two categories: (1) DSL, and (2) Cable.
This is typically the local ILEC providing DSL to 99% of the people, and a local cable company with a franchising agreement in the locality providing the cable plant.
Chances are your office falls into one of those categories too, although some offices may have something more complicated like an expensive bonded setup or MetroE technology.
If there's any huge diversity in employees' network connectivity from L2 to L4: it must be that many employees live in different cities far enough away to be fed by different telco central offices.
Not in years. I used to work as a sys admin for HP, and they used to cover this, but then when times got a little tight they said, essentially "you all have internet anyway, so we're not paying for it anymore".
At which point, you tell them that they can no longer expect you checking your e-mail from home or doing anything like that, because you don't have a company sanctioned network connection.
Assuming it's actually integrity and not disgruntlement...
For a professional: disgruntlement generally means they are not being given the appropriate consideration and respect as a person.
Generally, such a thing won't be disgruntlement -- but if they're one of the few insane ones, then a proper interview should weed them out.
Warm water can have a non-trivial environmental impact but newer plants can reduce this to trivial by having a lot of small outlets instead of one large one.
They can construct an artificial body of water, and mix the output water with fresh water, before releasing it back into the sea.
They should follow the approach Google is using in some datacenters, and use the recycled/treated gray water for the power plant.
The power plants need not take in potable water; they could largely take in the sewer water, before using it to cool the plant, treat it a bit further, and then dump that back out into the rivers....
More power plants = more greenhouse gases = global warming = higher seas
Except if the higher seas are too hot for cooling the plant, also due to global warming....
When your complete IT is based on SaaS, just send everyone home and let them work from home. All the tools they need are "in the cloud"
That requires prior planning, and probably requires you to pay for your workers' internet connections or reimburse some portion of their fees.... Your workers might not otherwise have the appropriate connectivity to do this. It also won't work, if the network affecting issue also takes out your workers' home connectivity and effects multiple ISPs in the area -- the issue may be more widespread than the business' link.
Your CRM being SaaS does no good; if your CSR doesn't have an office at home, and a POTS line that you can redirect customer calls to.
Moving to the cloud doesn't solve this, per se, if you move all your infrastructure to say Amazon you're still beholden to that company and its internal procedures. A system administration on their part could easily render you down for many hours.
A data loss on their part could render you down permanently; Do you have a SLA? Do you have proof that your cloud vendors have DR solutions?
What is your action plan if your leased-line WAN goes down, and your internet service provider tells you that it will be 48 to 72 hours to resolve? May be a fiber cut, or worse. Drunk drivers can take down networks and POPs too.
Can PayPal do that? They've worked so hard to not be a bank, would they be able to blacklist you in bank systems?
I am pretty sure Paypal would be able to report ACH "fraud".
As for Chexsystems; I don't know. You don't necessarily have to be a bank to report to them though -- you could be a retailer, for example.