We don't need policy. We need the women to turn around and slap the shit out of the assholes and the other men standing around to beat the crap out of him.
In other words... shit happens. The guy driving a truck loaded up with might fall asleep at the wheel and drive it into your building. A blizzard might drop several feet of snow on New York city. A meteor might crash into your data center... There all kinds of unusual circumstances that can destroy your stuff. Are you prepared?
I think Katrina demonstrated that a properly aimed cat 3 can do tons of damage. But, we might as well ask the question "Are we prepared for a tanker truck full of hydrogen to crash into Amazon's datacenter?"
It actually took me a bit to realize that I don't care about what other localities decide to do or not do. If San Fransisco wants to make pet ownership illegal and composting mandatory, that is their choice. If the subdevelopment down the street decides all houses must be pink with blue roofs, that is their choice. If NYC wants to harass new mothers, fine. If Arizona wants to pass 'crazy' laws, fine. I don't have to live in any of those places. What makes this country great is we can pass insane local laws that say you can't eat chicken on Tuesday and it's ok. The anti-chicken-eating-on-Tuesday people can all live together and leave me alone.
It takes a lot actually to realize it doesn't matter what the crazies in the county over do cause they all think you are just as crazy. Eventually he will get it or tear his hair out in despair. Now get off my lawn!
Because it is good engineering practice to know what has been done before? We do not build things in a vacuum, but rather we build upon the successes and failures of others. By knowing what has failed in the past we can avoid those traps in the future and by knowing what has worked we can have a firm foundation upon which to improve.
I wonder if part of that has to do with rich people wanting to make sure they get the biggest bang for their buck. Consider this logic... I can give $1 to the salvation army guy every time I walk past him and hope he isn't putting it in his pocket as soon as I walk around the corner, or I can collect all the $1's I would have given him, put it in a trust so that it is self sustaining and then build a school? The second option takes a lot more time and effort than the first. It might be that people with money get bogged down in the process of moving that much money around. So it might not be that they are less altruistic, but that they have implementation failures. Just a thought.
If you have bothered to read any of the articles about her decision you will see that she addresses that issue. She decided that the church is wrong on that point. You can't complain about people blindly following a religious leader and then also complain when they decide the religous leader is wrong. Disagreeing about specific implementations of policy does not exclude you from the church.
Its kind of like how just because Obama says the health care law isn't a tax and is a good idea, a lot of Americans can still disagree with him and we don't get exhiled. Or when Bush invaded Iraq all the Americans that disagreed with that are all still Americans.
If you die, your wife will go through the appropriate channels with the lawyers, etc to get access to your money. You don't need to give her the account password. It will take time, but you want the process of declaring you dead and transferring you assets to be hard.
If you don't trust her with the bank account password, why are you going to trust her with access to a safe-deposit box or safe containing the password?
If you have personal information on your laptop that you do not want you wife to know now, why do you want her to know it after you are dead?
And point of fact, I am a developer, not IT. The infrastructure and tools exist to support me, not make my life hard. If I have to try to bring a GUI back through a bazzilion proxies so I can compile I am not going to be happy. And let's face it, IT infrastructure isn't create by IT people. it's created by managers who think they had a good idea and want to minimize costs.
And if you only design your interfaces to allow the typical user to be able to use it, then you will find your users cursing you. Just because most people don't need it doesn't mean that you leave it out.
Cause sometimes you are remoteing to a system by logging into a server across the street which logs into a server in Texas so you can log into the desktop down the hall and bringing the GUI back through all the proxies makes you cry cause your IT infrastructure sucks?
The bigger question is though... who gives a crap what happens to the company? You already got your island in the Carribean. There is a difference between your personal assets and the company assets. If you set your company up correctly, you are sheilded. The company gets sued under, you don't. You still have the island and a couple million in your bank account.
The close captions have always pissed me off. The options are always something like the following: english for the deaf and hearing impaired, spanish, french,..." There are actually a lot of non-deaf people who turn the subtitles on. Why don't they just say "english"?
If you are serious about wanting good subtitles available, you should beat up on the content providers that do not provide netflix with good subtitles. Many of the shows I have watched on netflix have extreamly poor quality subtitles. I have actually seen subtitles along the lines of "@#$!$$#%^#."
I used to watch some of the netflix shows with the CC on, but I turned it off because the CC did not match the audio at all. Nor was it synced. Whoever gives them the CC is not meeting the standards.
The door analogy isn't really applicable here. The door tells us that entering the building requires authorization. Its more like you lived in a commecial district and decorated your house like a thrift store and were then surprised when people thought you were a thrift store and walked in the door.
If you see a file on the internet, it is assumed (like the thrift store downtown) that anyone can access it. You know a buisness is closed by trying to open the door. If the door opens, they are open and you can enter. If the door is locked, you know you can't enter. You didn't know you couldn't enter until you tried the door. On the web you need to explicitly tell people they can't access a file by locking the door. Otherwise, there is no way to know you are authorized.
If I call up a company and ask for confidential information and they give it to me, that is there fault, not mine. How am I to know what they consider confidential? If I then turn around and hit them up for extortion or blackmail, then I get to go to jail.
Slashdot Mirror
We don't need policy. We need the women to turn around and slap the shit out of the assholes and the other men standing around to beat the crap out of him.
In other words... shit happens. The guy driving a truck loaded up with might fall asleep at the wheel and drive it into your building. A blizzard might drop several feet of snow on New York city. A meteor might crash into your data center... There all kinds of unusual circumstances that can destroy your stuff. Are you prepared?
I think Katrina demonstrated that a properly aimed cat 3 can do tons of damage. But, we might as well ask the question "Are we prepared for a tanker truck full of hydrogen to crash into Amazon's datacenter?"
It actually took me a bit to realize that I don't care about what other localities decide to do or not do. If San Fransisco wants to make pet ownership illegal and composting mandatory, that is their choice. If the subdevelopment down the street decides all houses must be pink with blue roofs, that is their choice. If NYC wants to harass new mothers, fine. If Arizona wants to pass 'crazy' laws, fine. I don't have to live in any of those places. What makes this country great is we can pass insane local laws that say you can't eat chicken on Tuesday and it's ok. The anti-chicken-eating-on-Tuesday people can all live together and leave me alone.
It takes a lot actually to realize it doesn't matter what the crazies in the county over do cause they all think you are just as crazy. Eventually he will get it or tear his hair out in despair. Now get off my lawn!
Because it is good engineering practice to know what has been done before? We do not build things in a vacuum, but rather we build upon the successes and failures of others. By knowing what has failed in the past we can avoid those traps in the future and by knowing what has worked we can have a firm foundation upon which to improve.
A lot of problems could be solved if we just took the D and R off the balots. Just think if you had to know the name of the guy you were voting for!
How do you trigger a recording before the panic button is pressed?
Or rip the onstar system out as soon as you get in the car and it's turned on...
I wonder if part of that has to do with rich people wanting to make sure they get the biggest bang for their buck. Consider this logic... I can give $1 to the salvation army guy every time I walk past him and hope he isn't putting it in his pocket as soon as I walk around the corner, or I can collect all the $1's I would have given him, put it in a trust so that it is self sustaining and then build a school? The second option takes a lot more time and effort than the first. It might be that people with money get bogged down in the process of moving that much money around. So it might not be that they are less altruistic, but that they have implementation failures. Just a thought.
If you have bothered to read any of the articles about her decision you will see that she addresses that issue. She decided that the church is wrong on that point. You can't complain about people blindly following a religious leader and then also complain when they decide the religous leader is wrong. Disagreeing about specific implementations of policy does not exclude you from the church.
Its kind of like how just because Obama says the health care law isn't a tax and is a good idea, a lot of Americans can still disagree with him and we don't get exhiled. Or when Bush invaded Iraq all the Americans that disagreed with that are all still Americans.
Because this is slashdot and the appropriate legal solutions that have existed for centuries for asset transfer aren't good enough.
Kill the secretary?
If you die, your wife will go through the appropriate channels with the lawyers, etc to get access to your money. You don't need to give her the account password. It will take time, but you want the process of declaring you dead and transferring you assets to be hard.
If you don't trust her with the bank account password, why are you going to trust her with access to a safe-deposit box or safe containing the password?
If you have personal information on your laptop that you do not want you wife to know now, why do you want her to know it after you are dead?
And this is different from now how?
Or you get a new wife...
And point of fact, I am a developer, not IT. The infrastructure and tools exist to support me, not make my life hard. If I have to try to bring a GUI back through a bazzilion proxies so I can compile I am not going to be happy. And let's face it, IT infrastructure isn't create by IT people. it's created by managers who think they had a good idea and want to minimize costs.
And if you only design your interfaces to allow the typical user to be able to use it, then you will find your users cursing you. Just because most people don't need it doesn't mean that you leave it out.
I can click on a file and hit delete in a GUI :P
Cause sometimes you are remoteing to a system by logging into a server across the street which logs into a server in Texas so you can log into the desktop down the hall and bringing the GUI back through all the proxies makes you cry cause your IT infrastructure sucks?
The bigger question is though... who gives a crap what happens to the company? You already got your island in the Carribean. There is a difference between your personal assets and the company assets. If you set your company up correctly, you are sheilded. The company gets sued under, you don't. You still have the island and a couple million in your bank account.
The close captions have always pissed me off. The options are always something like the following: english for the deaf and hearing impaired, spanish, french, ..." There are actually a lot of non-deaf people who turn the subtitles on. Why don't they just say "english"?
If you are serious about wanting good subtitles available, you should beat up on the content providers that do not provide netflix with good subtitles. Many of the shows I have watched on netflix have extreamly poor quality subtitles. I have actually seen subtitles along the lines of "@#$!$$#%^#."
I used to watch some of the netflix shows with the CC on, but I turned it off because the CC did not match the audio at all. Nor was it synced. Whoever gives them the CC is not meeting the standards.
Hey... that totaly never happens...
The door analogy isn't really applicable here. The door tells us that entering the building requires authorization. Its more like you lived in a commecial district and decorated your house like a thrift store and were then surprised when people thought you were a thrift store and walked in the door.
If you see a file on the internet, it is assumed (like the thrift store downtown) that anyone can access it. You know a buisness is closed by trying to open the door. If the door opens, they are open and you can enter. If the door is locked, you know you can't enter. You didn't know you couldn't enter until you tried the door. On the web you need to explicitly tell people they can't access a file by locking the door. Otherwise, there is no way to know you are authorized.
If I call up a company and ask for confidential information and they give it to me, that is there fault, not mine. How am I to know what they consider confidential? If I then turn around and hit them up for extortion or blackmail, then I get to go to jail.
So... shooting trespassers is ok if we eat them afterwards?