I notice you're no longer posting your email address in your comments.
Only because of spammers and trolls. My email address is publicly available, well posted on Usenet and mailing lists, and evidently available on mnay spam lists. Of course, that is my spam trap email address.
My business email address is available via whois information, as well as PR records on the DNS servers that I set up/maintain. And, of course, on our website.
My personal email address that I wish to not receive spam on, alas, is priveleged knowledge, and is only known to a select few. Of course, it is available as the email address of the administrator of my subdomain, and is aliased to postmaster@my.subdomain.com. So there are ways of finding it. And it doesn't take an 3l33t h4ck0r, or the CIA, to do it.
Big deal! So they managed to map their public space and their mail servers on the inside. All of this is pretty easy to find out and is hardly supposed to be a secret.
As for the email addresses and sysadmin names, I really don't think that's a big deal.
"Simply knowing the names and e-mail addresses that Matta turned up would be enough for some social engineers to get the rest of the information necessary to mount an attack,"
Guess we better stop posting our email addresses and names! And, god forbid, get rid of your business cards! And don't forget your whois information!!!!
If that's really an avenue to social engineering, then we're all in trouble.
heard all the raves about tabbed browsing and I downloaded a copy of Mozilla 0.9 to try it out. It's the exact same thing as the Search/Favorites/History panel in IE! I don't get how this is "revolutionary". (Please, if you care to enlighten me on how it is different, do so. I'd welcome a better explanation.)
Forget IE, forget Mozilla, and though Opera's tabs are decent, check out Netcaptor. Based on IE's component engine, it does justice to tabs.
And, to stay on topic, you can configure QuickSearches with almost EVERY search engine (google included) where you just type an abbreviation and the search term in the address bar. I, for instance, have Google as g, AltaVista as av, Network Solution's Whois as wh, etc. It'll change the way you browse.
Note, that it's shareware, but it's really worth the money. Up to around version 6.5 it was freeware, then they included ads (yech!), then went to a 30-day demo. But at $29.95, it's definitely worth it.
We use a pretty simple convention:
4 letter company abbreviation (we merged recently, and this saved our asses) + 2 letter site location + 2 letter function + 2 number ID. so, for instance, a server in the Ontario, Canada data center that is a SQL server would be:
xxxxONDB01.
It only varies for Domino servers and Web servers where they get 3 letters for function. LD for Lotus Domino and then D or M for whether they are exclusively a database server or a database and mail server. And WBX for external web server, and WBI for internal web servers
DC = domain controller
FS = File server
PS = Print server
DB = Database server. whether it Oracle, DB2, or SQL, it's all the same.
LDx = Lotus Domino server
EX = Exchange Server
NS = Domain Name Server (implies WINS server as well)
WBx = Web server
FW = Firewall
RT = Router
SW = Managed Switch
HB = Managed Hub
Haven't had any problems with renaming servers, mostly because it's frowned upon to repurpose a server without formatting it first. That, and we're real strict about keeping dedicated servers for most things. The plus of this is that I can immediately telnet to Hong Kong's file server without having to call the local admin and figure out the name of it. Some of our locations are a little ambigous with their 2 letter abbreviation, but after you've seen a few of them, you pick it up pretty quick. I've been meaning to put the 2 letter city codes and function codes in a policy handout, but haven't had the time, so it's more of an informal thing between site admins right now.
Hmmm...I would say the Bureau of Labor Statistics are about as an authoritative source on this subject as there is. I'm quite sure they're more authoritative than your anecdoctal evidence.
If they're employed at all, they are probably underemployed.
Perhaps they are, but they're still employed. Sometimes you'll have to weather a storm anywhere you can get to. A lot of people who were never laid off are underemployed simply because no one will give them a chance to prove themselves. You do what you have to in order to make ends meet.
I have interviewed at probably four dozen companies, give or take, and I have only been asked about my degree once with the laughing question "why did you major in THAT?" Of course, there was no degree on the hiring manager's wall, and we were negotiating a salary that was a third of his.
Instead of getting angry and bitter, why not ask yourself why you didn't get those jobs? The company was obviously hiring, or else they wouldn't have interviews. They hired somebody...why not you?
An entertainment company released two movies last summer. Both had eight figure opening weekends, approximately two weeks apart. During those two weeks, they fired 8000 people. But that's ok, right? There's always Dice.com, right?
Yes, that is ok. Just like it's ok for me to take half of my colleagues and quit without notice, sending my employer into immediate disarray and probably out of business. Unethical? Perhaps. But anyone expecting loyalty from an corporation is hopelessly naive.
$40,000 after taxes.
$28,000 after rent (or house payment, HA! right...)
$23,000 after food
$19,000 after car/gas/repairs
$15,000 after utilities
$6,000 after getting fired in month 8
-$9,000 after being unemployed for 10 months
Unless you're physically or mentally disabled, or live in the Arctic, there's little excuse to not be employed after 10 months of full time job hunting. Maybe you'll need to switch industries. But people outside of the tech sector have had to do that for years. We're not above economics.
So, I wonder if the mortgage company will understand if the house payment "turns around unexpectedly?" Somehow I doubt it. Of course, it isn't the homeowner's fault, but they'll still throw him and his financed furniture into the street.
So, it's the employer's fault? Does the employer have an obligation to keep everyone they ever hired on the payroll? If the employee is a good employee, he will find another company that can (ab)use him for profits. If he's not, then he may need to set his sights on a different goal.
It's not the employer's fault either. Of course not! I mean, their only purpose is to make money, right? They have no responsibility. There is no exchange here. They have no obligation except to extract revenue from the economy as efficiently and as quickly as possible, right? Does that sound about right?
That's exactly right. As a side effect of extracting revenue, however, they propel our economy. And my only responsiblity to my employer is to cash my paycheck. My only purpose at work is to make money. My employer's motivation for keeping me around is that I make him more money than he pays me.
...and it happens to people who are among the most employable there are: college educated, highly knowledgeable, well experienced and technical people with spectacular resumes. There are thousands of them, HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF THEM, AND THEY ARE UNEMPLOYABLE.
UNEMPLOYABLE.
A little too far on the doom 'n' gloom side today, aren't we? Even for a Monday.
According to the latest unemployment statistics, national unemployment is around 8% for high school dropouts, and 3% for college grads (over 25 years old). Doesn't really seem like comapnies are "firing people at random." Oh, and the motivation of profits is what keeps them from firing at random.
BTW, the median wage for programmers is around $60,000. You should definitely be able to save some money and have DR plans in place when making that. Most Americans live at and slightly above their means, and so take it on the chin when things turn around unexpectedly. That's not necessarily the employer's fault, however.
Because it's just like making copies for friends and family. It's fair use.
No it damn well isn't. If I hear one more Slashdotter claim that personal/friends/family copies are "fair use", I will quite seriously bust a gut. Here are the allowable purposes for making a copy of a copyrighted work: (1) criticism and comment, (2) parody and satire, (3) scholarship and research, (4) news reporting and (5) teaching [publaw.com]. Don't argue this with me, quote a specific case of a court saying that copies for friends and family are OK.
Not to mention the technicalities (already covered by other/.ers) of the language such as, let me introduce another argument. I'll title this argument, the Audio Home Recording Act of 1992, aka the DAT tax.
You see, when the RIAA was upset about Digital Audio Tapes being used to pilfer their music, they came to an agreement with the consumer electronics industry. The RIAA agreed to make noncommercial copying a non-infringing act (not exactly, but we'll get into that a bit later) in exchange for royalty payments and limits on serial copying.
Now the bit about non infringement, section 1008. You see, it wasn't actually made non-infringing explicitly, as in the original copyright law language for fair use. It, instead, says that "...no action may be brought under this [Copyright] title alleging infringement of copyright based on...the noncommercial use by a consumer...making digital music recordings...". A might bit different, and good arguing point for high paid lawyers.
Now, the arguing points. For one, Section 1001 defines a "digital audio recording device" as:
"...any machine or device of a type commonly distributed to individuals for use by individuals, whether or not included with or as part of some other machine or device, the digital recording function of which is designed or marketed for the primary purpose of, and that is capable of, making a digital audio copied recording for private use, except for--
(A) professional model products, and
(B) dictation machines, answering machines, and other audio recording equipment that is designed and marketed primarily for the creation of sound recordings resulting from the fixation of nonmusical sounds."
Whether a P2P program falls under that category, I leave as an exercise to the reader, lawyers, and judges.
A more damning definition comes in subsection (4B). A digital audio recording medium..."...does not include any material object that is primarily marketed and most commonly used by consumers either for the purpose of making copies of motion pictures or other audiovisual works or for the purpose of making copies of nonmusical literary works, including computer programs or data bases." That's a tough one to argue against.
There's many other arguments that can be made both for and against Napster clones for falling under the AHRA. Napster, eveidently, failed to convince their judge of the applicability. IANAL, and therefore do not get paid to research this, so I'll leave it to interested parties to delve further.
But, to get back on point, the RIAA can't sue for noncommercial copying of analog or digital music, as defined by the AHRA. So you can add that to your list of fair use items...and have publaw.com update their section if they don't mention the AHRA.
Saying "immigrants should be whipped back through the Channel Tunnel" is obnoxious, but not dangerous. Saying "Let's meet up on Saturday at the Channel Tunnel entrance to give some immigrants a whipping" is dangerous. This is a clear and simple distinction.
No, that's not dangerous. Meeting at the Channel Tunnel entrance is not dangerous. Only when you actually start to give some immigrants a whipping are you dangerous. Why can't we simply punish people for their actions....not try to regulate what led them to those actions?
don't run explorer.exe on my windows box at all. I use an open source 32-bit shell called Litestep. It is infinitely configurable and themeable. There are tons of themes to download, or you can dive right in and edit the rc files yourself. You can make it look like any Linux WM or desktop environment. I love desktop-click popup menus, which is one of the countless modules available. The main litestep.net site is down right now, but checkout Shellfront [shellfront.org] for info and links on Litestep and a few other replacement shells for windows. If you know Win32 programming, grab the source and dive in, the dev team is in a bit of disarray at the moment.
I used to run different shells on Win98. It's pretty much a no brainer to replace explorer.exe all together, despite the FUD spread here. IIRC, there was one called Talisman that let you use HTML to create a desktop and folders. If you like, you could use command.com (or CMD.EXE in NT/2000) as your shell and never have to load explorer. This would be similar to Linux sans X, but would stil allow you to run graphical apps without loading the shell. (On MS, the window manager and GUI tools would still be loaded.)
So when I'm forty, I no longer have the rights to something I wrote when I was twenty? How is that a logical, financially viable, and potentially useful solution?
Is what you produced at 20 really that damn good that you deserve to live off it for the rest of your life? Can you not produce something else, or get a day job? What have you done with the money earned during those 20 years?
Most workers have no rights to anything they've created. And must keep creating (profit) in order to stay employed. Should writers and authors be any different?
Should corporations be able to hold rights to something they didn't create? Did the Constitution really mean that corporations would be allowed to hold copyrights? (Anyone know when the 1st corporation filed for a copyright?)
The only argument I can see for copyrights extending to life and beyond would be in the case of a work that didn't enjoy prosperity until well after it was released.
Your great grandfather was a famous writer. Your parents never did anything with the property where his house was, but when you inherited it, you went up there and found a first draft, never been published, masterpiece. But it has been far more than 20 years since he died and publishers refuse to publish it because it is already public domain. Which gives you NO financial incentive to see the work published.
Why should I profit from my great-grandfathers work? Or my father's work, for that matter? If Pappy didn't feel it was good enough for publication, or didn't want to publish it and be paid for it, why should I be able to?
As fo rno publisher's wanting it...Are you saying they're afraid of capitalism? That they don't feel they can compete on price and quality, and must have a gov't mandated monopoly to peddle their wares? Absolutely ridiculous....
Re:Good for some, nightmare for others
on
Peek-a-Boo(ty)
·
· Score: 2
IANAL (is anyone on Slashdot?), but I'd think that a complaint would have to be filed, then disregarded, before a sexual harassment suit would be even discussed.
If a complaint came in, then I'd chastise the employee for being stupid, and talk to his manager. At that point, it's out of my hands.
I trust that the execs and HR dept. hire qualified individuals to do their job. My job is to maintain the PC's, servers, and network. It's not to police users. If HR can't hire good ones, and managers can't fire bad ones, then the company has a boatload of other problems to worry about.
Re: At least you have the monitoring idea right
on
Peek-a-Boo(ty)
·
· Score: 2
Beyond that, I think it's wrong for managers of other departments to request/expect I.T. to "fill them in on what so-and-so is doing on the web", or to complain that something's not "locked down tight enough". If you know you have employees surfing where you don't want them surfing, take care of it yourself!
At my last admin gig, I refused to provide managers with info on what sites were being accessed, what email was being rec'd, and what personal files were on hard drives. If a direct order didn't come from an executive or the IT Director, then it was not my place to rat out employees.
Talk about liability! I have no way of knowing/proving that John Doe accessed this site. I only know that John Doe's PC accessed xxx.com. But PHB's won't understand the difference.
Managers wouldn't ask someone in a cube famr what the guy next to him was surfing, why should I be put in that position? The other employees are my colleagues, and I refuse to disrespect them simply because I control the servers.
These "professional" programmers have released CONSTANTLY obviously buggy code for years. Big whoop about your opinion as the proof is in the result and it mostly sucks. Why the HELL do you not know that everyone associates the word "Microsoft" with "pain"? They can slap on all the "Microkernal", "Dynamic Functionality", and "More Better" bullshit buzzwords, but that doesn't stop me from being FORCED to reboot at least 3 times a day for fairly stupid OS reasons.
You're obviously an idiot. And it's obviously not the OS, because I can run a Win98 box for weeks without rebooting. I'm sure your Win98 OS is the same as my Win98 OS, so you're problem lies in either a)hardware and/or their drivers, b)poorly written software, or c)misconfiguration.
And don't start telling that an OS that lets programs and/or drivers do X is flawed. We all know of ways to crash OS's. It's the programmers job to write and test their programs to make sure it works. If they can't program around bugs in Windows, then they should release their product for Macintosh, Linux, etc.
Even if they were, would they? I work at a chain retail store that uses EAS (Electronic Article Surveillance) tagging. Every one of those little mothers is supposed to be disabled or removed at the checkout stand. But the doors still go off a surprising number of times over the course of the day.
Wouldn't most of these RF tags be on a sticker of some sort? Some stores, Eckerd's comes to mind as one, have the security tags built in to a UPC/price sticker. When you buy the item, it's disabled. But, if it were an RF tag, then you'd just peel it off and toss it in the trash. Of course, I suppose someone could scan my trash to find out what I had bought...but I don't think anyone with a UPC database would care enough to do that.
Um, if the business model was fine, then why did they have to have to use questionable accounting practices (to hide the massive debt)? Maybe to cover the fact that the business model was a load of bull wank in the first place? Maybe they could have tried to sell bottled linux geek farts.
No, there was, and isn't, anything wrong with their basic business model. I actuallt have a client (Florida Gas Utilities) that does very well doing the same thing...albeit on a smaller scale.
Enron was a bit ambitous after the success of their trading in energy markets, however. They got into broadband, telephone, and some other markets. And just becasue you have debt doesn't necessarily mean that the plan is flawed. Most companies start out with debt, then go into debt further to expand, advertise, etc., and continually have debt. Just like you and me (think mortgage, credit cards, and car loan), it's difficult for a company to survive and make a profit without carrying debt.
Was Enron's debt too high? Yes, it was...but not, AFAIK, as a result of their busines plan. More than likely, bad management is the culprit. And trying to expand a bit too much a bit too fast.
And I'm sure there's some trolls out there who would love to buy your farts.
Did anyone read the Enron Human Rights Statement [enron.com]? The part concerning "fair compensation" for employees was quite laughable:)
Honorable mentions also go to the clause concerning the conducting of businesses according to given laws, along with the section concerning "Respect".
I hate to defend Enron...but you should probably wait until the facts are straightened out before jumping to too many conclusions. It's very possible that Enron operated within the law...just about everything that I've heard about is (or could be, depending on unknown circumstances), technically, legal. Though Enron pushed them a liitle further than most
It's legal to set up off shore subsidaries to launder money for tax purposes. (Exxon has 6, Enron had 900+)
It's legal, and common practice, to have employer stock heavy 401k's. A lot of companies match 401k contributions with company stock. This is, in effect, free money to the employee. Many employees take advantage of this, and end up having an undiversified 401k account.
It's legal to prevent employees from seeling their 401k stock...if it's not paid for. A lot of companies will finance the price of their stock fro their employees, and deduct the cost from their paycheck for a period of time. Until it's completely paid off, you can't sell the stock. It's possible that this was how it worked at Enron. The execs, making more money, were able to pay off their stock purchases befor rank ands filers.
And of course, campaign contributions are legal. And so is asking an administration for help...and even getting it (see General Motors and the airline industry).
Come on, if Slashdotters decided energy policy it would be based on the original "Napster" business model. Come to think of it, perhaps that wasn't that different from what Enron did.
Enron's business model was fine (treat energy (among other things) as a commodity to be traded and sold), it was their accounting practices that caused the trouble. Many corporations have debt (see: Amazon.com), they just don't try to hide it as much as Enron did. Note that almost all corporations engage in creative accounting practives (known as window-dressing) to make themselves look better...but Enron went a bit further than that.
Oh yeah...and Enron basically laundered money to avoid paying taxes. And then that whole 401k debacle.
They ripped off my computer!
My computer [theshop.net] has been my computer for the last 2 years. It is a pentium 233MMX with 64 megs of ram and 2 hard drives. It has a DSL "bridge" above it.
It was built into my desk and has survived 2 moves and lasted a long time.
Oh my god. I thought the Tabletop PC was an ugly mother...but then I saw yours. What the hell is that?! That's the ugliest thing I've ever seen! I think the Tabletop PC has got you beat by a mile in asthetics...and there's is downright ugly.
Focus on profit doesn't imply heartlessness. In fact the total benefit to the economy (of wich we are all a part) is much greater when a business maximizes its profits.
Hmmm...seems to me that if the business maximizes profits, then the people up top (and investors, ot a point) are the beneficiaries. Sure, some of that money will cycle back through the economy, but a CEO making $5 mil more a year isn't going to spend/actively invest all of it. If you paid 1000 rank and filers $5000 more a year, probably 99% of it would be spent.
IMHO, capitalism has the unintended consequence of collecting the wealth to the top. Remember the old adage, "the rich get richer, and the poor get poorer." Conservatives/Republicans don't see it this way, and thus, fail to see the logic in so called "socialist income redistribution" programs. What those programs are doing, however, is allowing capitalism to extend it's useful life as an economic system. Of course, better wages for rank and filers, and reasonable salaries for top manangement would be just as, if not more, effective...but greed won't allow that to happen.
This article is so misplaced. "Scared of Linux, try our box?" just does not seem the right message for/. 'Check out the review!' smells like blurb.
Am I the only one who suspects someone is paying someone to get Infomercials onto Slashdot?
Well, damn, where's my check then? Check out my User Info if you think I'm being paid for this.
I ran across an ad in Computer Shopper for this product, checked it out (as I'm in the business of setting up servers for small companies), and saw that it used Linux. I thought, "That's an interesting application of Linux and shows a lot of promise. I wonder what the/. community thinks." and submitted the story.
Oh, and I figure dartek.com probably got a clue from their referral logs. Not everyone is as stupid as Samrobb seems to be.
Sorry, but this product does not demonstrate any such thing. Using any OS in this kind of device makes it an embedded OS and therefore invisible to the end user. If it's invisible then by definition it has no usability, good or otherwise.
I'm sure Linux was a good choice for the OS in this product, as it's cheap and infinitely configurable. But the OS's inherent ease of use to the customer is not on the list.
While you could make an argument that it's an embedded OS, it'd be a stretch, since it runs the full Linux kernel.
And, I don't see how invisible translates to no usability. It's configurable by Webmin (or similar), and most non network admins would like a low or no maintenance server.
Oh, and BTW, among Linux's many fine traits, I have never found an "inherent ease of use" among them.
Did you never see a business grow?
What if a starup company uses this server, and their human resources double? who is going to migrate this stuff?
Is it not in their budget then to hire a consulatant or full time admin? If not, then I submit that the start-up will have more trouble than migrating data.
As we all know - that can be more annoying than not doing anything at all. Do what microsoft etc do - just miss out the almost.
Well, I'm pretty sure you're going to have to provide some information. Such as ISP dial-up number, username/password combos for dial-in and POP accounts. Perhaps even shared drive structures, DNS zone info, DNS forwarders (if used), etc. There are some things I can't imagine that this thing could pick up by sniffing the network....Though, if it could, it would truly be wonderous....I could just use it as a replacment for sticky notes and my failing memory. =)
Slashdot Mirror
Only because of spammers and trolls. My email address is publicly available, well posted on Usenet and mailing lists, and evidently available on mnay spam lists. Of course, that is my spam trap email address.
My business email address is available via whois information, as well as PR records on the DNS servers that I set up/maintain. And, of course, on our website.
My personal email address that I wish to not receive spam on, alas, is priveleged knowledge, and is only known to a select few. Of course, it is available as the email address of the administrator of my subdomain, and is aliased to postmaster@my.subdomain.com. So there are ways of finding it. And it doesn't take an 3l33t h4ck0r, or the CIA, to do it.
As for the email addresses and sysadmin names, I really don't think that's a big deal.
Guess we better stop posting our email addresses and names! And, god forbid, get rid of your business cards! And don't forget your whois information!!!!
If that's really an avenue to social engineering, then we're all in trouble.
Forget IE, forget Mozilla, and though Opera's tabs are decent, check out Netcaptor. Based on IE's component engine, it does justice to tabs.
And, to stay on topic, you can configure QuickSearches with almost EVERY search engine (google included) where you just type an abbreviation and the search term in the address bar. I, for instance, have Google as g, AltaVista as av, Network Solution's Whois as wh, etc. It'll change the way you browse.
Note, that it's shareware, but it's really worth the money. Up to around version 6.5 it was freeware, then they included ads (yech!), then went to a 30-day demo. But at $29.95, it's definitely worth it.
4 letter company abbreviation (we merged recently, and this saved our asses) + 2 letter site location + 2 letter function + 2 number ID. so, for instance, a server in the Ontario, Canada data center that is a SQL server would be:
xxxxONDB01.
It only varies for Domino servers and Web servers where they get 3 letters for function. LD for Lotus Domino and then D or M for whether they are exclusively a database server or a database and mail server. And WBX for external web server, and WBI for internal web servers
DC = domain controller
FS = File server
PS = Print server
DB = Database server. whether it Oracle, DB2, or SQL, it's all the same.
LDx = Lotus Domino server
EX = Exchange Server
NS = Domain Name Server (implies WINS server as well)
WBx = Web server
FW = Firewall
RT = Router
SW = Managed Switch
HB = Managed Hub
Haven't had any problems with renaming servers, mostly because it's frowned upon to repurpose a server without formatting it first. That, and we're real strict about keeping dedicated servers for most things. The plus of this is that I can immediately telnet to Hong Kong's file server without having to call the local admin and figure out the name of it. Some of our locations are a little ambigous with their 2 letter abbreviation, but after you've seen a few of them, you pick it up pretty quick. I've been meaning to put the 2 letter city codes and function codes in a policy handout, but haven't had the time, so it's more of an informal thing between site admins right now.
Hmmm...I would say the Bureau of Labor Statistics are about as an authoritative source on this subject as there is. I'm quite sure they're more authoritative than your anecdoctal evidence.
Perhaps they are, but they're still employed. Sometimes you'll have to weather a storm anywhere you can get to. A lot of people who were never laid off are underemployed simply because no one will give them a chance to prove themselves. You do what you have to in order to make ends meet.
Instead of getting angry and bitter, why not ask yourself why you didn't get those jobs? The company was obviously hiring, or else they wouldn't have interviews. They hired somebody...why not you?
Yes, that is ok. Just like it's ok for me to take half of my colleagues and quit without notice, sending my employer into immediate disarray and probably out of business. Unethical? Perhaps. But anyone expecting loyalty from an corporation is hopelessly naive.
Unless you're physically or mentally disabled, or live in the Arctic, there's little excuse to not be employed after 10 months of full time job hunting. Maybe you'll need to switch industries. But people outside of the tech sector have had to do that for years. We're not above economics.
So, it's the employer's fault? Does the employer have an obligation to keep everyone they ever hired on the payroll? If the employee is a good employee, he will find another company that can (ab)use him for profits. If he's not, then he may need to set his sights on a different goal.
That's exactly right. As a side effect of extracting revenue, however, they propel our economy. And my only responsiblity to my employer is to cash my paycheck. My only purpose at work is to make money. My employer's motivation for keeping me around is that I make him more money than he pays me.
A little too far on the doom 'n' gloom side today, aren't we? Even for a Monday.
According to the latest unemployment statistics, national unemployment is around 8% for high school dropouts, and 3% for college grads (over 25 years old). Doesn't really seem like comapnies are "firing people at random." Oh, and the motivation of profits is what keeps them from firing at random.
BTW, the median wage for programmers is around $60,000. You should definitely be able to save some money and have DR plans in place when making that. Most Americans live at and slightly above their means, and so take it on the chin when things turn around unexpectedly. That's not necessarily the employer's fault, however.
Not to mention the technicalities (already covered by other /.ers) of the language such as, let me introduce another argument. I'll title this argument, the Audio Home Recording Act of 1992, aka the DAT tax.
You see, when the RIAA was upset about Digital Audio Tapes being used to pilfer their music, they came to an agreement with the consumer electronics industry. The RIAA agreed to make noncommercial copying a non-infringing act (not exactly, but we'll get into that a bit later) in exchange for royalty payments and limits on serial copying.
Now the bit about non infringement, section 1008. You see, it wasn't actually made non-infringing explicitly, as in the original copyright law language for fair use. It, instead, says that "...no action may be brought under this [Copyright] title alleging infringement of copyright based on...the noncommercial use by a consumer...making digital music recordings...". A might bit different, and good arguing point for high paid lawyers.
Now, the arguing points. For one, Section 1001 defines a "digital audio recording device" as:
Whether a P2P program falls under that category, I leave as an exercise to the reader, lawyers, and judges.
A more damning definition comes in subsection (4B). A digital audio recording medium..."...does not include any material object that is primarily marketed and most commonly used by consumers either for the purpose of making copies of motion pictures or other audiovisual works or for the purpose of making copies of nonmusical literary works, including computer programs or data bases." That's a tough one to argue against.
There's many other arguments that can be made both for and against Napster clones for falling under the AHRA. Napster, eveidently, failed to convince their judge of the applicability. IANAL, and therefore do not get paid to research this, so I'll leave it to interested parties to delve further.
But, to get back on point, the RIAA can't sue for noncommercial copying of analog or digital music, as defined by the AHRA. So you can add that to your list of fair use items...and have publaw.com update their section if they don't mention the AHRA.
No, that's not dangerous. Meeting at the Channel Tunnel entrance is not dangerous. Only when you actually start to give some immigrants a whipping are you dangerous. Why can't we simply punish people for their actions....not try to regulate what led them to those actions?
I used to run different shells on Win98. It's pretty much a no brainer to replace explorer.exe all together, despite the FUD spread here. IIRC, there was one called Talisman that let you use HTML to create a desktop and folders. If you like, you could use command.com (or CMD.EXE in NT/2000) as your shell and never have to load explorer. This would be similar to Linux sans X, but would stil allow you to run graphical apps without loading the shell. (On MS, the window manager and GUI tools would still be loaded.)
Is what you produced at 20 really that damn good that you deserve to live off it for the rest of your life? Can you not produce something else, or get a day job? What have you done with the money earned during those 20 years?
Most workers have no rights to anything they've created. And must keep creating (profit) in order to stay employed. Should writers and authors be any different?
Should corporations be able to hold rights to something they didn't create? Did the Constitution really mean that corporations would be allowed to hold copyrights? (Anyone know when the 1st corporation filed for a copyright?)
The only argument I can see for copyrights extending to life and beyond would be in the case of a work that didn't enjoy prosperity until well after it was released.
Why should I profit from my great-grandfathers work? Or my father's work, for that matter? If Pappy didn't feel it was good enough for publication, or didn't want to publish it and be paid for it, why should I be able to?
As fo rno publisher's wanting it...Are you saying they're afraid of capitalism? That they don't feel they can compete on price and quality, and must have a gov't mandated monopoly to peddle their wares? Absolutely ridiculous....
At my last admin gig, I refused to provide managers with info on what sites were being accessed, what email was being rec'd, and what personal files were on hard drives. If a direct order didn't come from an executive or the IT Director, then it was not my place to rat out employees.
Talk about liability! I have no way of knowing/proving that John Doe accessed this site. I only know that John Doe's PC accessed xxx.com. But PHB's won't understand the difference.
Managers wouldn't ask someone in a cube famr what the guy next to him was surfing, why should I be put in that position? The other employees are my colleagues, and I refuse to disrespect them simply because I control the servers.
You're obviously an idiot. And it's obviously not the OS, because I can run a Win98 box for weeks without rebooting. I'm sure your Win98 OS is the same as my Win98 OS, so you're problem lies in either a)hardware and/or their drivers, b)poorly written software, or c)misconfiguration.
And don't start telling that an OS that lets programs and/or drivers do X is flawed. We all know of ways to crash OS's. It's the programmers job to write and test their programs to make sure it works. If they can't program around bugs in Windows, then they should release their product for Macintosh, Linux, etc.
Wouldn't most of these RF tags be on a sticker of some sort? Some stores, Eckerd's comes to mind as one, have the security tags built in to a UPC/price sticker. When you buy the item, it's disabled. But, if it were an RF tag, then you'd just peel it off and toss it in the trash. Of course, I suppose someone could scan my trash to find out what I had bought...but I don't think anyone with a UPC database would care enough to do that.
No, there was, and isn't, anything wrong with their basic business model. I actuallt have a client (Florida Gas Utilities) that does very well doing the same thing...albeit on a smaller scale.
Enron was a bit ambitous after the success of their trading in energy markets, however. They got into broadband, telephone, and some other markets. And just becasue you have debt doesn't necessarily mean that the plan is flawed. Most companies start out with debt, then go into debt further to expand, advertise, etc., and continually have debt. Just like you and me (think mortgage, credit cards, and car loan), it's difficult for a company to survive and make a profit without carrying debt.
Was Enron's debt too high? Yes, it was...but not, AFAIK, as a result of their busines plan. More than likely, bad management is the culprit. And trying to expand a bit too much a bit too fast.
And I'm sure there's some trolls out there who would love to buy your farts.
I hate to defend Enron...but you should probably wait until the facts are straightened out before jumping to too many conclusions. It's very possible that Enron operated within the law...just about everything that I've heard about is (or could be, depending on unknown circumstances), technically, legal. Though Enron pushed them a liitle further than most
It's legal to set up off shore subsidaries to launder money for tax purposes. (Exxon has 6, Enron had 900+)
It's legal, and common practice, to have employer stock heavy 401k's. A lot of companies match 401k contributions with company stock. This is, in effect, free money to the employee. Many employees take advantage of this, and end up having an undiversified 401k account.
It's legal to prevent employees from seeling their 401k stock...if it's not paid for. A lot of companies will finance the price of their stock fro their employees, and deduct the cost from their paycheck for a period of time. Until it's completely paid off, you can't sell the stock. It's possible that this was how it worked at Enron. The execs, making more money, were able to pay off their stock purchases befor rank ands filers.
And of course, campaign contributions are legal. And so is asking an administration for help...and even getting it (see General Motors and the airline industry).
Enron's business model was fine (treat energy (among other things) as a commodity to be traded and sold), it was their accounting practices that caused the trouble. Many corporations have debt (see: Amazon.com), they just don't try to hide it as much as Enron did. Note that almost all corporations engage in creative accounting practives (known as window-dressing) to make themselves look better...but Enron went a bit further than that.
Oh yeah...and Enron basically laundered money to avoid paying taxes. And then that whole 401k debacle.
Oh my god. I thought the Tabletop PC was an ugly mother...but then I saw yours. What the hell is that?! That's the ugliest thing I've ever seen! I think the Tabletop PC has got you beat by a mile in asthetics...and there's is downright ugly.
Hmmm...seems to me that if the business maximizes profits, then the people up top (and investors, ot a point) are the beneficiaries. Sure, some of that money will cycle back through the economy, but a CEO making $5 mil more a year isn't going to spend/actively invest all of it. If you paid 1000 rank and filers $5000 more a year, probably 99% of it would be spent.
IMHO, capitalism has the unintended consequence of collecting the wealth to the top. Remember the old adage, "the rich get richer, and the poor get poorer." Conservatives/Republicans don't see it this way, and thus, fail to see the logic in so called "socialist income redistribution" programs. What those programs are doing, however, is allowing capitalism to extend it's useful life as an economic system. Of course, better wages for rank and filers, and reasonable salaries for top manangement would be just as, if not more, effective...but greed won't allow that to happen.
I think you may be looking at that stick backwards. Slashdotted is in the Jargon file!
While you could make an argument that it's an embedded OS, it'd be a stretch, since it runs the full Linux kernel.
And, I don't see how invisible translates to no usability. It's configurable by Webmin (or similar), and most non network admins would like a low or no maintenance server.
Oh, and BTW, among Linux's many fine traits, I have never found an "inherent ease of use" among them.
Is it not in their budget then to hire a consulatant or full time admin? If not, then I submit that the start-up will have more trouble than migrating data.
Well, I'm pretty sure you're going to have to provide some information. Such as ISP dial-up number, username/password combos for dial-in and POP accounts. Perhaps even shared drive structures, DNS zone info, DNS forwarders (if used), etc. There are some things I can't imagine that this thing could pick up by sniffing the network....Though, if it could, it would truly be wonderous....I could just use it as a replacment for sticky notes and my failing memory. =)