The way Secur-ID is managed normally is to expire tokens before the battery dies. That used to be about a couple of years. The user gets the token in plenty of time and then kills the old token and activates the new from within a session.
The MPAA still has to go through the Oz legal system for the extradition. Not everyone there wishes brown-nose their way to the US like John Howard and it would be fun to seem the MPAA having to pay costs.
Good point. I had forgotten about that extention. I'm posting from a Deb system so had ignored that.
The human checking thing is what I would like to see. Its like when a speed camera got someone for doing something like 180 when the top speed of that particular car was about 100Mph. The accused won that one after going to court and calling a representative from the car manufacturer as a witness. If a human had properly looked at the data and the car type they might have investigated further and deduced that the camera was wrong.
Back to the MPAA, yes, if they had looked at python-twisted-1.3..., the name doesn't look like a film. The size, as you observe, is far too small. No, the script kiddies who do this work just produce lists which via some mail-merge, gets turned into C&D letters without any checking. It seems to me that the MPAA should be taken to court themselves. However, their legal resources probably exceed that of the average OS hoster.
If I recall, they look more along the lines of we own the copyright but you get to distribute them *and* enforce copyright. With films that are dubbed then it is more complicated as the local distributor probably did the dubbing and owns that.
I would still like someone to force the MPAA to show they own "Twisted.py". That could be fun.
You can normally only claim a trademark for a particular use of a name. For example, you can claim Apple in connection with computers and Apple in connection with music publishing, no problems until one does the other (as is happening now).
Most films are just copyrighted rather than trademarked. Some like Star Wars (TM) are both. However, was Twisted trademarked, and is there any film called Valgrind?
Which brings us back to whats in a name. Both Twisted and Valgrind are somewhat linked to their function. Would you prefer to invoke something called Twisted.py or "An.event.driven.threaded.engine.for.messing.with. networks.py"?
Lets keep the names short and memorable. If we want semantic value, we can always look them up.
What is the MPAA doing trying to get a take-down notice against an Australian entity anyway? They do not even have rights to the films in Australia, having signed them over to the distributors there.
I wonder what the MPAA found? A tar.gz file, an rpm? If their agents are so idiotic to chase after something called python-twisted-1.3.0-1.1.fc2.dag.i386.rpm without checking if it is a film then they should be made to suffer by forcing the issue into court. Let the MPAA engage a lawyer in Oz and and then show them to be wasting the court's time.
If you are a public corporation, then Sarbanes-Oxley applies. This mandates disclosure of any issues that may affect share price. Any time bombs waiting to go off, i.e., major systems problems, that are known about must be disclosed. If senior management is aware of a serious problem that they do not disclose, then they can be in serious trouble.
I was just at a job at a major international bank that wanted to outsource/offshore the software development for a massive new project. They ended up ignoring their own smart-sourcing qualification programme and put it out to the lowest bidder.
An extremely well-known carribean based consultancy picked up the job and promptly started making serious mistakes and the project ended up being canned.
Moral of the story is that a sensible way to treat bids is to look at cost, quality level and timeliness of delivery. The construction industry uses standards compliance and penalties for not meeting them or deadlines.
IBM is a very large organisation and it takes time for the message to go through the organisation. They will often bid 'high' with solutions on the basis that they are IBM and you aren't coming to them for the cheapest solution. You may also drop IBM in it by mentioning that AIX is effectively being EOLed (not exactly true, but the writing *is* on the wall for the AIX kernel).
The best way of dealing with this is to get the senior salesperson into a corner and tell them that this is probably the first part of a new strategy and if they blow the budget there won't be any follow-on.
It kind of sucks when you work about two security doors and a hundred metres away from daylight. Do you take a coat or a jacket when you go out for lunch or don't you? Checking a webcam or current weather was a regular pre-lunch activity.
A fixed key represents bad cryptography. Thomson also do military stuff so they may be competent, so maybe they are trying for something more interesting. The things is that many people must know the algorithm and the only secret is the key. Once that is compromised, you suddenly have a lot of dead hardware.
So we put the key on a smartcard. Again, the channel between the card and the processor is subject to interception or manipulation. Again, not trivial.
In the end, we can't really stop someone with a player recoding the output for something else.
The necessity of the Scouring came down to showing how actions away may have consequences at home. The Shire was a wonderful place but in the end, it is another part of Middle Earth and it is as vulnerable. Note that I don't believe that it needs long, but is an important part of the end of the book. PJ didn't think so and he also made another mistake with Faromir in The Two Towers (although this was corrected later), however his other changes worked well (i.e., extending the role of Arwen).
The scouring was important. It should have been there at least for the EE. It was aluded to in the meeting with Galadriel (PJ even seemed to have some footage). There were a lot of other endings such as the marriage, the elves leaving for the west with Bilbo and Gandalf, but without the scouring, we do not see how the hobbits have changed.
In the area of IT for investment banking many people complained because it was very hard to get into. All hirers wanted to have people who worked well under pressure and had the kind of mentality to realise that rounding errors on pennies was important.
Along came offshoring and immediately, no previous experience required. The projects appeared to save a lot of money, but nobody cared whether they worked or not. Well it helps for an idiot on the board to say that the offshored projects succeed no matter what and anyone saying otherwise is fired.
I see where you are coming from and agree with you about the real savings of outsourcing/off-shoring. However, it is a little more difficult to look at taxation this way.
Dollars lost in payroll taxes are a loss of income for the state and federal government. It isn't really a tax break as this is really just taxes on income that the employee isn't paying. You can't force taxation on importing services (it is too complicated, causes reciprocal failures and transfer costs can be rigged).
So how would you make it more economical for companies to use locals, perhaps having a negative tax, i.e. a small subsidy to be paid per head on the payroll by the state.
Actually where the Steklov Institute of Mathematics is, St. Petersburg, is a beautiful city and he decided to return from the US to live there. Others would too, if it wasn't for the idiots currently running the country.
Lastly, it is useful to remind people that there are excellent mathematicians and software developers there and you don't always need to go to India for offshore solutions.
If it is the case of a certain major Caribbean based consultancy, best deal means you quote half the price of your competitors with zero competence in your offshore delivery centre. You screw up big time (well about $15 mil) but because everyone is so embarrassed, they don't talk about it. If the money gets anywhere, it is through some very dubious tax havens and essentially, customer and shareholder are swindled.
The requirement for IT to be anywhere is directly relevant to the application. You can get anywhere in the world if they know your application, but sorry, there are many people who lack domain specific knowledge. Yes there are things that are well defined that are possible to do offshore, but take something a little more complicated. Sorry, you have just lost a lot of money.
The management excuse is the same as during the S&L saga as in "Whoops, really?". They simply turn around and say that "everyone else is doing it" having just lost the bank a bundle.
The problem with outsourc ing comes down to communications. You must factor this into yozur calculations.
Maybe you can specify a tennis show down to a 'T', but even with the assistance of a large consulting company, a large bank foreign-exchange system is different.
Sometimes doing business 10,000 miles away and at the other end of a telephone is too expensive. This is independent of the quality measures proposed.
they stopped doing this a year after I took the course, due to time constraints (we have 7 week terms).
Immediately a lesson was learned! One a project has been outsourced beyond your building, the need for a formal methodology means that it will take more time.
Outsourcing simply means the use of external resources, be they consulting companies or independent contractors. They may even be working inhouse.
If they are working down the road but relatively close, they may be referred to as onshore, if they are in an adjacent country with similar culture and timezones then this is near shore. A company in the US or Western Europe outsourcing to Asia, is off-shoring.
Really, if these jobs are going to Indians with CS degrees...why wouldn't they deserve the job? If they're qualified, why not give them work? I mean, if two workers are both qualified, and one will work cheaper, you hire the cheaper one.
It really isn't about the degrees, two graduates are to a better or lesser extent very similar. It is about the capability of the organisation that they join. The critical point is domain specific knowledge? Who do you expect to know more about credit derivatives, JP Morgan or some brand X consulting company in India that last week was working on a payroll system. You are right that almost anyone can code (we'll ignore jokes abot Redmond here) but it is very difficult for an offshore company to acquire enough domain specific expertise.
Sure if everything is specified down to the last detail, but then with a formal methodology, the actual coding part is the smallest part of the job.
You are so right. I was thinking that to have potential ITstaff to go on this class is a waste of time. It should be for the MBAs. Anyone in the IT industry knows about specs, however management doesn't appreciate how much effor it is to specify everything down to the lat detail for someone to implement 10,000 miles away.
Unless you get to work with the good code, you don't have positive examples.
OTOH, I'm pretty sure there is good code in Microsoft. I read some of Dave Cutler's source code from when he was with Digital (the source code to RSX-11M was given to customers, and listings to VMS customers. It was clean, well structured and well commented (very much needed for the assembler stuff).
Slashdot Mirror
The way Secur-ID is managed normally is to expire tokens before the battery dies. That used to be about a couple of years. The user gets the token in plenty of time and then kills the old token and activates the new from within a session.
The MPAA still has to go through the Oz legal system for the extradition. Not everyone there wishes brown-nose their way to the US like John Howard and it would be fun to seem the MPAA having to pay costs.
The human checking thing is what I would like to see. Its like when a speed camera got someone for doing something like 180 when the top speed of that particular car was about 100Mph. The accused won that one after going to court and calling a representative from the car manufacturer as a witness. If a human had properly looked at the data and the car type they might have investigated further and deduced that the camera was wrong.
Back to the MPAA, yes, if they had looked at python-twisted-1.3..., the name doesn't look like a film. The size, as you observe, is far too small. No, the script kiddies who do this work just produce lists which via some mail-merge, gets turned into C&D letters without any checking. It seems to me that the MPAA should be taken to court themselves. However, their legal resources probably exceed that of the average OS hoster.
I would still like someone to force the MPAA to show they own "Twisted.py". That could be fun.
Most films are just copyrighted rather than trademarked. Some like Star Wars (TM) are both. However, was Twisted trademarked, and is there any film called Valgrind?
Which brings us back to whats in a name. Both Twisted and Valgrind are somewhat linked to their function. Would you prefer to invoke something called Twisted.py or "An.event.driven.threaded.engine.for.messing.with. networks.py"?
Lets keep the names short and memorable. If we want semantic value, we can always look them up.
I wonder what the MPAA found? A tar.gz file, an rpm? If their agents are so idiotic to chase after something called python-twisted-1.3.0-1.1.fc2.dag.i386.rpm without checking if it is a film then they should be made to suffer by forcing the issue into court. Let the MPAA engage a lawyer in Oz and and then show them to be wasting the court's time.
If you are a public corporation, then Sarbanes-Oxley applies. This mandates disclosure of any issues that may affect share price. Any time bombs waiting to go off, i.e., major systems problems, that are known about must be disclosed. If senior management is aware of a serious problem that they do not disclose, then they can be in serious trouble.
An extremely well-known carribean based consultancy picked up the job and promptly started making serious mistakes and the project ended up being canned.
Moral of the story is that a sensible way to treat bids is to look at cost, quality level and timeliness of delivery. The construction industry uses standards compliance and penalties for not meeting them or deadlines.
The best way of dealing with this is to get the senior salesperson into a corner and tell them that this is probably the first part of a new strategy and if they blow the budget there won't be any follow-on.
It kind of sucks when you work about two security doors and a hundred metres away from daylight. Do you take a coat or a jacket when you go out for lunch or don't you? Checking a webcam or current weather was a regular pre-lunch activity.
So we put the key on a smartcard. Again, the channel between the card and the processor is subject to interception or manipulation. Again, not trivial.
In the end, we can't really stop someone with a player recoding the output for something else.
The necessity of the Scouring came down to showing how actions away may have consequences at home. The Shire was a wonderful place but in the end, it is another part of Middle Earth and it is as vulnerable. Note that I don't believe that it needs long, but is an important part of the end of the book. PJ didn't think so and he also made another mistake with Faromir in The Two Towers (although this was corrected later), however his other changes worked well (i.e., extending the role of Arwen).
I have a Mont Blanc and it doesn't fly well. This is why I use a Mont Blanc ball-point (also a good pen) more.
The scouring was important. It should have been there at least for the EE. It was aluded to in the meeting with Galadriel (PJ even seemed to have some footage). There were a lot of other endings such as the marriage, the elves leaving for the west with Bilbo and Gandalf, but without the scouring, we do not see how the hobbits have changed.
Not until you fly. The drop in cabin pressure can trigger unfortunate leaks, even on expensive pens.
Along came offshoring and immediately, no previous experience required. The projects appeared to save a lot of money, but nobody cared whether they worked or not. Well it helps for an idiot on the board to say that the offshored projects succeed no matter what and anyone saying otherwise is fired.
Dollars lost in payroll taxes are a loss of income for the state and federal government. It isn't really a tax break as this is really just taxes on income that the employee isn't paying. You can't force taxation on importing services (it is too complicated, causes reciprocal failures and transfer costs can be rigged).
So how would you make it more economical for companies to use locals, perhaps having a negative tax, i.e. a small subsidy to be paid per head on the payroll by the state.
Actually where the Steklov Institute of Mathematics is, St. Petersburg, is a beautiful city and he decided to return from the US to live there. Others would too, if it wasn't for the idiots currently running the country.
Lastly, it is useful to remind people that there are excellent mathematicians and software developers there and you don't always need to go to India for offshore solutions.
The requirement for IT to be anywhere is directly relevant to the application. You can get anywhere in the world if they know your application, but sorry, there are many people who lack domain specific knowledge. Yes there are things that are well defined that are possible to do offshore, but take something a little more complicated. Sorry, you have just lost a lot of money.
The management excuse is the same as during the S&L saga as in "Whoops, really?". They simply turn around and say that "everyone else is doing it" having just lost the bank a bundle.
Maybe you can specify a tennis show down to a 'T', but even with the assistance of a large consulting company, a large bank foreign-exchange system is different.
Sometimes doing business 10,000 miles away and at the other end of a telephone is too expensive. This is independent of the quality measures proposed.
Immediately a lesson was learned! One a project has been outsourced beyond your building, the need for a formal methodology means that it will take more time.
If they are working down the road but relatively close, they may be referred to as onshore, if they are in an adjacent country with similar culture and timezones then this is near shore. A company in the US or Western Europe outsourcing to Asia, is off-shoring.
Sure if everything is specified down to the last detail, but then with a formal methodology, the actual coding part is the smallest part of the job.
You are so right. I was thinking that to have potential ITstaff to go on this class is a waste of time. It should be for the MBAs. Anyone in the IT industry knows about specs, however management doesn't appreciate how much effor it is to specify everything down to the lat detail for someone to implement 10,000 miles away.
OTOH, I'm pretty sure there is good code in Microsoft. I read some of Dave Cutler's source code from when he was with Digital (the source code to RSX-11M was given to customers, and listings to VMS customers. It was clean, well structured and well commented (very much needed for the assembler stuff).