Those characteristics can be a result of poor personal management and planning.
Working with other people to manage their finances (Dave Ramsey classes), I find that individuals on the lower end of the income scale do not have resources and savings due to their inability to discipline themselves in their own spending. Eating out instead of eating in, frivolous spending on entertainment and multiple data streams into the home, multiple car notes simultaneously, and so forth are the result of bad decisions, not that of poor station in life.
I've seen those making in the 20's to 30's with 4 children who were living paycheck to paycheck begin to discipline themselves and start to rise out of this poverty mentality. By denying their instincts to "pleasure now", they are able to rise above their station and plan for "pleasure later" all due to self discipline.
It can be done and is being done in large scale simply by beginning to discipline yourself, stop borrowing money you don't have, live within your means, and taking care of business before pleasure.
Atlanta suburbs here... 3 story home on an acre in an HOA neighborhood with 4 pools, courts, exercise facilities, etc. 300k out the door.
Granted, Atlanta is taking on roughly 75k people every year, but the tech market is doing extremely well, and the salaries are on par with PHX/AUS/SJC/SFO for IC level roles.
Yes, I'll eventually leave due to crowding, but for the time being, it's a great place to live and raise a family.
I want it reverse order chronologically. Nothing else.
Unfortunately, they not only make "relevant" the default, they prevent you from setting it chronological permanently, changing it back when they damn well feel like it.
STOP telling me how I should interact with my social circle. If I want to see what happened the MOST recent in time, that's what I want to see. Now, Facebag is just a way to hear from old friends and extended family. If I want to chat with actual friends, I text them or hit them up on Instagram.
Integrator/Architect here... I travel all over the country (USA) for $CFGMGMT software company doing implementations and training in said package. Further, I do professional services engagements to implement and deploy devops workflows and integration paths for both operational and development workflows. I can say with great confidence that after reading the 150-ish comments here that I've only seen one or two commenters that come close to "getting" modern devops.
As for the RTFA implications, many people saw right through his silliness. Developer in an ivory tower thinking his world is grand and majestic and lauded above all other disciplines. I guess that explains some of the crap in Python (but I digress).
I've been in this business since before the bubble. I have done systems work dating all the way back to the 80's. At that time there were many silos with few bridges between. The first iteration of "devops" I remember seeing can be quantified as developers seeking root access. Even to this day, the answer is continually a resounding "no". Why? Are devs automatically rejected due to what specific tower they are residing in? Are they rejected because of the "separation of powers" or because of "politics"? Are ops folks just dicks with a chip on their shoulder?
I think a number of things have happened and if you'll indulge me, perhaps we can break this conversation out more to see what's going on today.
Back in the day, we had an operations team, systems team, qa team, and dev team. Loosely defined, these were the folks in the NOC monitoring everything and pushing ticket events to the right teams via triage, doing prints and getting them ready for the requestor, managing backups and access to the computer room, etc... general "operational" tasks. Day to day "operations" of the center of computing for your facility. At some point, this title got applied to anything that smacked of someone whose fingers touched anything made of metal. When this seemed to change? Late 90's-ish. I don't have specifics, but that's my recollection. Remember also that different sections of the country progress at different rates, so YMMV.
Then there was the "systems team". Different sites had different monikers for this team from "engineering" (which PEs got pissed about) to "architecture" to "Systems Admins" to... well, whatever title HR thought was appropriate and met their organizational/talent distribution goals, but the work was generally the same. Storage, systems (mid range, intel, mainframe, etc.), capacity planning, backup systems and strategies, disaster recovery, and a myriad of other specializations within systems work. This is the specific "field" of systems work that breeds organizations like SAGE/LOPSA, etc. Those in these organizations dig into the very nuts and bolts of admin as a career and a field of expertise, following current research and methodologies and bettering themselves each and every day. I would offer that while dev folks can be quite competent in various systems tasks, they're just not a sysadmin (much less an engineer or architect). They really have no place in this area REGARDLESS of their quality at it.
Many times I've heard dev get bent out of shape because "ops is being a blocker" or "we can't get anything done because ops is saying 'no'". It's unfortunate to be that myopic and that selfish. What many devs don't understand is the ops person they're dealing with is supporting sometimes as many as 10 different DEV teams operating on the exact same hosts or clusters of hosts and one or two of those environments is the pet project of VP #13 that agreed to a bunch of junk on the golf course that isn't in the statement of work, but is being offered "on the sly". They don't understand that dev #22, who has relationship with VP #11 and can essentially get what they want has forced you to introduce "whiz bang package or library 1.2.3.4" while the safe, researched, CERT recommended package is 1.2.2.2 (and, incidentally is the one all the other dev teams are u
I Googled "History of the 5th Amendment" and got a crap=ton of hits. Not the least of which is this:
"The Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution provides that "no person... shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself." The right was created in reaction to the excesses of the Courts of Star Chamber and High Commission—British courts of equity that operated from 1487-1641. These courts utilized the inquisitorial method of truth-seeking as opposed to the prosecutorial, meaning that prosecutors did not bear the burden of proving a case, but that sufficient "proof" came from browbeating confessions out of the accused.
These courts required the accused to answer any question put to him, without advance notice of his accusers, the charges against him, or the evidence amassed. With the abolition of the Courts of Star Chamber and High Commission, the common law courts of England incorporated this principle of nemo tenetur—that no man should be bound to accuse himself. By the 18th century, English law provided that neither confessions coerced during the trial nor pretrial confessions obtained through torture could be used. This was based on the belief that coerced confessions were inherently unreliable.
The right to be free from self-incrimination was established in nine state constitutions and was a tenet of the common law throughout most of the colonies before it appeared in the U.S. Constitution. Since then, the U.S. Supreme Court has expanded the Fifth Amendment to apply not only to criminal proceedings and pretrial proceedings in criminal matters, including police-station interrogations, but also to "any other proceeding, civil or criminal, formal or informal, where his answers might incriminate him in future criminal proceedings." The law also prohibits prosecutors from making reference to a defendant's refusal to take the stand as probative of guilt. So long as the government is compelling potentially incriminating speech—either before a jury or a Senate Committee—the right can be invoked."
>Distance/video learning can help to enlighten. It can even help to educate people who genuinely want to learn (typically, this works better with adults).
I have to agree here. I'm in a distance-learning theology coursework, and I'm doing 10X the work I ever did while I was in college, and learning and retaining more.
The problem here is one of relegating your own hiring practices to the realm of the very employee you are trying to avoid. Let me explain...
I helped a local University (the one I attended) install a pretty massive software package. I trained their entire team on how to use it, and how to bring in what they knew about UNIX scripting to make the thing even more powerful.
Six months later, one of the basic admin gigs came open, and I applied for it. I was well qualified for the position, and my experience outweighed everyone else in the department. I was perfect for the job. The screener was the department head, who was a good friend of mine as well. He was painfully sorry he couldn't hire me because the University had a "college degrees only" policy for hiring, and would have no one in these positions that didn't have a degree.
Best part: a girl with a degree in Kinesiology got the gig in the computing services department doing that job. I had to train her too.
I'm sorry you can't comprehend that this does happen out there. 15 years of Java in 2000. 10 years of Windows 2000 in 2002. I've seen both asked. In fact, MANY times this has been covered right here on Slashdot... several years ago. Long before you ever joined the site.
You should really pause to consider who the readers and posters in Slashdot are. Many of them are employers, consultants, engineers... Those with PhD's and in fields of research you'll never be a part of. Many of us work for the largest companies in the world.
Or 10 years of Windows 2000 in 2002.
The answer is always the same, too... "that's what my client wants" and my answer is also always the same: "Then your client is an idiot and you can't count."
I think this'll only affect the desktop market. (why I run my desktop OSes - Linux, Windows, OSX - on a Mac instead of a PC). In the server space, though, that's big freaking money, and I think the manufacturers will be extremely reluctant to cause this trouble in that space. One of two things could happen here, I think... this will be enough of a political black eye that MS will give in and suggest allowances for other OSes or there will be pressure coming back from the server side toward desktops that can effect change.
In any event, this will be interesting to watch.
Based on the dealings I have had with IBM over there years (several companies, different projects), IBM needs to spend their time figuring out how to make their own products work rather than trying to figure out user behavioral patterns.
The fact that I've never seen a single IBM project completed at an employer of mine in the 20 years I've been in IT tells me that instead of searching their email, folks might actually need to use it as a "To-Do" instead.
http://43folders.com/http://inbozero.com/
Actually, since the inception of the Berne convention, Copyright was modified that copyright laws from country to country would be observed across political and national lines. Prior to Berne, there were no guidelines, and individual countries' copyright laws held, but for their own country.
Most of these things are managed through the World Intellectual Property Organization and its Copyright Treaty signed by a great number of nations. So, diatribe aside, it isn't just the U.S.
Re:What's the deal with the rush of TSA stories re
on
TSA Pats Down 3-Year-Old
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
No Agenda Show actually.
They exposed (as the first scanners were going in) that the former chief of Homeland Security (Chertoff) is the one responsible for bringing them in. Nevermind his security consulting group has a client that manufactures the machines.
No Agenda has been consistently months ahead of both the news and public reaction on a number of similar issues.
http://noagendashow.com/
>> we banned the admins from touching the critical environments unless the software engineers who had designed said environments okayed it
Interesting quote here. In the UNIX world (I'm assuming you're talking a Win environment) the security structure is exactly the opposite. You grant permissions just enough for development to do their job, granting sudo level access where necessary, holding it back where appropriate.
Often times you'll find that the very most brilliant of software developers are quite uninitiate in the ways of the operating system (unless they're a systems programmer, at which point this comment does not apply). They know an IDE, perhaps some basic shell to get their job done, and maybe even a very small portion of the software serving stack they're dealing with (in a web services world, this tends to be the case).
In my 20 years, I've only found 3 or 4 developers that could be trusted with shell to their own serving platform. Sad, but true.
That's why I find your comment so interesting. I have never seen it where the developers (usually clueless) dictated system access policies to admins. Admins are admins for a reason.:)
Someone educate me...
My php.ini lists the xmlrpc feature under the heading "Windows Extensions" and references an xmlrpc.dll, I have no further references to XML/RPC anywhere in here.
Since it is an XML/RPC, wouldn't the existence of the ability to load this DLL indicate possible infectability of Windows systems as well?
Do the one thing the bank will do nearly anything to prevent... Publicize it far and wide. Let everyone know the bank, their name, and the cities affected wherein people whose information was compromised live. Once their customer base is all over their phone lines demanding information that only you can provide.
Of course, unless you signed an NDA in which case...ignore me.:)
Slashdot Mirror
Those characteristics can be a result of poor personal management and planning.
Working with other people to manage their finances (Dave Ramsey classes), I find that individuals on the lower end of the income scale do not have resources and savings due to their inability to discipline themselves in their own spending. Eating out instead of eating in, frivolous spending on entertainment and multiple data streams into the home, multiple car notes simultaneously, and so forth are the result of bad decisions, not that of poor station in life.
I've seen those making in the 20's to 30's with 4 children who were living paycheck to paycheck begin to discipline themselves and start to rise out of this poverty mentality. By denying their instincts to "pleasure now", they are able to rise above their station and plan for "pleasure later" all due to self discipline.
It can be done and is being done in large scale simply by beginning to discipline yourself, stop borrowing money you don't have, live within your means, and taking care of business before pleasure.
Couldn't read the article if I wanted to. It was paywalled. And I'll be DAMNED if I'm going to sign up for content that is otherwise free.
Atlanta suburbs here... 3 story home on an acre in an HOA neighborhood with 4 pools, courts, exercise facilities, etc. 300k out the door. Granted, Atlanta is taking on roughly 75k people every year, but the tech market is doing extremely well, and the salaries are on par with PHX/AUS/SJC/SFO for IC level roles. Yes, I'll eventually leave due to crowding, but for the time being, it's a great place to live and raise a family.
I want it reverse order chronologically. Nothing else. Unfortunately, they not only make "relevant" the default, they prevent you from setting it chronological permanently, changing it back when they damn well feel like it. STOP telling me how I should interact with my social circle. If I want to see what happened the MOST recent in time, that's what I want to see. Now, Facebag is just a way to hear from old friends and extended family. If I want to chat with actual friends, I text them or hit them up on Instagram.
I'm not the only one who'd never heard of them. *whew*
Papers are completely unnecessary to do the job, and years in the business with a successful track record ALWAYS trumps a sheet of paper.
Integrator/Architect here... I travel all over the country (USA) for $CFGMGMT software company doing implementations and training in said package. Further, I do professional services engagements to implement and deploy devops workflows and integration paths for both operational and development workflows. I can say with great confidence that after reading the 150-ish comments here that I've only seen one or two commenters that come close to "getting" modern devops.
As for the RTFA implications, many people saw right through his silliness. Developer in an ivory tower thinking his world is grand and majestic and lauded above all other disciplines. I guess that explains some of the crap in Python (but I digress).
I've been in this business since before the bubble. I have done systems work dating all the way back to the 80's. At that time there were many silos with few bridges between. The first iteration of "devops" I remember seeing can be quantified as developers seeking root access. Even to this day, the answer is continually a resounding "no". Why? Are devs automatically rejected due to what specific tower they are residing in? Are they rejected because of the "separation of powers" or because of "politics"? Are ops folks just dicks with a chip on their shoulder?
I think a number of things have happened and if you'll indulge me, perhaps we can break this conversation out more to see what's going on today.
Back in the day, we had an operations team, systems team, qa team, and dev team. Loosely defined, these were the folks in the NOC monitoring everything and pushing ticket events to the right teams via triage, doing prints and getting them ready for the requestor, managing backups and access to the computer room, etc... general "operational" tasks. Day to day "operations" of the center of computing for your facility. At some point, this title got applied to anything that smacked of someone whose fingers touched anything made of metal. When this seemed to change? Late 90's-ish. I don't have specifics, but that's my recollection. Remember also that different sections of the country progress at different rates, so YMMV.
Then there was the "systems team". Different sites had different monikers for this team from "engineering" (which PEs got pissed about) to "architecture" to "Systems Admins" to... well, whatever title HR thought was appropriate and met their organizational/talent distribution goals, but the work was generally the same. Storage, systems (mid range, intel, mainframe, etc.), capacity planning, backup systems and strategies, disaster recovery, and a myriad of other specializations within systems work. This is the specific "field" of systems work that breeds organizations like SAGE/LOPSA, etc. Those in these organizations dig into the very nuts and bolts of admin as a career and a field of expertise, following current research and methodologies and bettering themselves each and every day. I would offer that while dev folks can be quite competent in various systems tasks, they're just not a sysadmin (much less an engineer or architect). They really have no place in this area REGARDLESS of their quality at it.
Many times I've heard dev get bent out of shape because "ops is being a blocker" or "we can't get anything done because ops is saying 'no'". It's unfortunate to be that myopic and that selfish. What many devs don't understand is the ops person they're dealing with is supporting sometimes as many as 10 different DEV teams operating on the exact same hosts or clusters of hosts and one or two of those environments is the pet project of VP #13 that agreed to a bunch of junk on the golf course that isn't in the statement of work, but is being offered "on the sly". They don't understand that dev #22, who has relationship with VP #11 and can essentially get what they want has forced you to introduce "whiz bang package or library 1.2.3.4" while the safe, researched, CERT recommended package is 1.2.2.2 (and, incidentally is the one all the other dev teams are u
I Googled "History of the 5th Amendment" and got a crap=ton of hits. Not the least of which is this:
... shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself." The right was created in reaction to the excesses of the Courts of Star Chamber and High Commission—British courts of equity that operated from 1487-1641. These courts utilized the inquisitorial method of truth-seeking as opposed to the prosecutorial, meaning that prosecutors did not bear the burden of proving a case, but that sufficient "proof" came from browbeating confessions out of the accused.
These courts required the accused to answer any question put to him, without advance notice of his accusers, the charges against him, or the evidence amassed. With the abolition of the Courts of Star Chamber and High Commission, the common law courts of England incorporated this principle of nemo tenetur—that no man should be bound to accuse himself. By the 18th century, English law provided that neither confessions coerced during the trial nor pretrial confessions obtained through torture could be used. This was based on the belief that coerced confessions were inherently unreliable.
The right to be free from self-incrimination was established in nine state constitutions and was a tenet of the common law throughout most of the colonies before it appeared in the U.S. Constitution. Since then, the U.S. Supreme Court has expanded the Fifth Amendment to apply not only to criminal proceedings and pretrial proceedings in criminal matters, including police-station interrogations, but also to "any other proceeding, civil or criminal, formal or informal, where his answers might incriminate him in future criminal proceedings." The law also prohibits prosecutors from making reference to a defendant's refusal to take the stand as probative of guilt. So long as the government is compelling potentially incriminating speech—either before a jury or a Senate Committee—the right can be invoked."
"The Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution provides that "no person
Seems plausible.
So many smart people on Slashdot. Why they no use their "Google-Fu"? http://www.teacherportal.com/teacher-salaries-by-state/
>Distance/video learning can help to enlighten. It can even help to educate people who genuinely want to learn (typically, this works better with adults).
I have to agree here. I'm in a distance-learning theology coursework, and I'm doing 10X the work I ever did while I was in college, and learning and retaining more.
The problem here is one of relegating your own hiring practices to the realm of the very employee you are trying to avoid. Let me explain... I helped a local University (the one I attended) install a pretty massive software package. I trained their entire team on how to use it, and how to bring in what they knew about UNIX scripting to make the thing even more powerful. Six months later, one of the basic admin gigs came open, and I applied for it. I was well qualified for the position, and my experience outweighed everyone else in the department. I was perfect for the job. The screener was the department head, who was a good friend of mine as well. He was painfully sorry he couldn't hire me because the University had a "college degrees only" policy for hiring, and would have no one in these positions that didn't have a degree. Best part: a girl with a degree in Kinesiology got the gig in the computing services department doing that job. I had to train her too.
I'm sorry you can't comprehend that this does happen out there. 15 years of Java in 2000. 10 years of Windows 2000 in 2002. I've seen both asked. In fact, MANY times this has been covered right here on Slashdot... several years ago. Long before you ever joined the site. You should really pause to consider who the readers and posters in Slashdot are. Many of them are employers, consultants, engineers... Those with PhD's and in fields of research you'll never be a part of. Many of us work for the largest companies in the world.
Or 10 years of Windows 2000 in 2002. The answer is always the same, too... "that's what my client wants" and my answer is also always the same: "Then your client is an idiot and you can't count."
I think this'll only affect the desktop market. (why I run my desktop OSes - Linux, Windows, OSX - on a Mac instead of a PC). In the server space, though, that's big freaking money, and I think the manufacturers will be extremely reluctant to cause this trouble in that space. One of two things could happen here, I think... this will be enough of a political black eye that MS will give in and suggest allowances for other OSes or there will be pressure coming back from the server side toward desktops that can effect change. In any event, this will be interesting to watch.
Based on the dealings I have had with IBM over there years (several companies, different projects), IBM needs to spend their time figuring out how to make their own products work rather than trying to figure out user behavioral patterns. The fact that I've never seen a single IBM project completed at an employer of mine in the 20 years I've been in IT tells me that instead of searching their email, folks might actually need to use it as a "To-Do" instead. http://43folders.com/ http://inbozero.com/
No, I launch iTerm and go into full-screen mode and never leave. You don't *have* to use the GUI for anything you don't want to.
> U.S. joined that one 1974 Also the year WIPO became a United Nations entity. Probably the reason why.
Actually, since the inception of the Berne convention, Copyright was modified that copyright laws from country to country would be observed across political and national lines. Prior to Berne, there were no guidelines, and individual countries' copyright laws held, but for their own country. Most of these things are managed through the World Intellectual Property Organization and its Copyright Treaty signed by a great number of nations. So, diatribe aside, it isn't just the U.S.
No Agenda Show actually. They exposed (as the first scanners were going in) that the former chief of Homeland Security (Chertoff) is the one responsible for bringing them in. Nevermind his security consulting group has a client that manufactures the machines. No Agenda has been consistently months ahead of both the news and public reaction on a number of similar issues. http://noagendashow.com/
What's a "modem"? ;)
try to find a union for IT in the U.S. And then try and waggle that around as a weapon in an at-will state, and see what that gets you...
>> we banned the admins from touching the critical environments unless the software engineers who had designed said environments okayed it Interesting quote here. In the UNIX world (I'm assuming you're talking a Win environment) the security structure is exactly the opposite. You grant permissions just enough for development to do their job, granting sudo level access where necessary, holding it back where appropriate. Often times you'll find that the very most brilliant of software developers are quite uninitiate in the ways of the operating system (unless they're a systems programmer, at which point this comment does not apply). They know an IDE, perhaps some basic shell to get their job done, and maybe even a very small portion of the software serving stack they're dealing with (in a web services world, this tends to be the case). In my 20 years, I've only found 3 or 4 developers that could be trusted with shell to their own serving platform. Sad, but true. That's why I find your comment so interesting. I have never seen it where the developers (usually clueless) dictated system access policies to admins. Admins are admins for a reason. :)
Someone educate me... My php.ini lists the xmlrpc feature under the heading "Windows Extensions" and references an xmlrpc.dll, I have no further references to XML/RPC anywhere in here. Since it is an XML/RPC, wouldn't the existence of the ability to load this DLL indicate possible infectability of Windows systems as well?
Macs are as low as $499. The old pricing issue is now a red herring.
Better yet...
:)
Do the one thing the bank will do nearly anything to prevent... Publicize it far and wide. Let everyone know the bank, their name, and the cities affected wherein people whose information was compromised live. Once their customer base is all over their phone lines demanding information that only you can provide.
Of course, unless you signed an NDA in which case...ignore me.