I think this is more just an indicator of mobile device usage. Apple's tooting their own horn, but I'm sure the android numbers are respectable which could mean closer to 65+ billion app downloads and growing at 2 billion+ a/month. The developer number is meaningless but makes Apple look charitable.
When I consider the communication skills myself, and most developers I know; we probably should work mastering communicating effectively in one spoken language first.
I think the Westboro Church is a bunch of insensitive asshole douche bags, however I don't think the answer is to form hate groups against the hate groups.
I salute you, noise is most likely the best way to protect yourself. I do the same from time to time also. My main point is the effective use of time, if you can easily be invisible by all means be invisible and I sincerely hope you can stay that way. But once the helicopter spot light is on you, it might not be worth the effort to get back into the shadows. But that is for each of us to decided.
They already have or can gain easy access to all that information. The govt already has a ton of info on you, tax records, dmv, etc. Business do also (you prolly get junk mail every day addressed to you.) It's a fact of life, it sucks, but thinking you can erase or hide your digital or paper trail is foolish. If you want to protect privacy spend your time fighting to protect it, don't waste it trying to hide.
There is a really good tech talk that touches on this. While McAfee seems to thinks this is a good thing, I believe it will most likely be a painful journey.
with and using are excellent error handling mechanisms that have no clutter and clearly define the protected code. Most exception handling is little more than logging what went wrong since many exceptions really don't have solutions that can be coded for. The main thing we are trying to do in these situations is write out some data so we can debug and clean up any messes (open connections for example) we have laying around so the things don't get worse.
AWS seems like the real key to the success here, not the use of open source software. While I think it's great that NASA took the open source route, I've read nothing to defend the position that this would not have been successful with non-open source software:
"A traditional, proprietary approach would not have been this successful, given the short time to deployment and shifting requirements that necessitated the ultimate in agility and flexibility."
Even the article praises AWS more than the open source software mentioned, it's main source of content appears to come from the linked article with information about the open source pieces of the stack added.
The real problem is two things. People either not understanding the quality of the tools (software) they are using, or willingness to use "good enough" software and gamble against a catastrophe. Given the financial market's track record, it's most likely more of the second. If I have no idea about how to judge the ripeness of fruit and I make a pie that makes me sick because the apples were rotten, how can I blame the apples?
That being said, as a developer I can honestly say about 99% of the code I've seen is not Scottish. (It's CRAP!)
The real question should when should I use a SQL solution and when should I use a NoSQL solution, or more specifically which database should I use for project X. Neither one is better than the other, as each has a specific problem it attempts to solve. As a community we should spend more time discussing what make a technology the best solution for a specific problem-space, not having fan-boy wars.
So they want to hire the people that are currently at war with them. A good idea, but not very realistic.
Maybe they could try and pass some more laws like SOPA or dodge the democratic process with ACTA-like treaties and see if that drums up more recruits.
The people they will get will be the "retired," mediocre to average hackers who are now married and have too much too lose and can be bought with cool toys.
In the last 8 years as a developer, I've seen 2 types of "agile."
Agile Fail:
This is by far the most common type, where a trendy word is used to defend lack of project structure/discipline/planning. IMHO this is not too much better than waterfall in the end.
Agile Succeed:
I've seen this once. This requires an intelligent, experienced, and disciplined team the whole way through (devs, managers, sys admins, and yes client too.) This works because you have people with the intelligence to understand the core principles of "agile" and apply them correctly to the individual project; the experience to know what "just enough" means in terms of docs, structure, managing, etc; and discipline to strictly follow agreed upon (within the team) best practices and standards. This is an incredible way to work and we did amazing things; I do not expect I will see it again because one bad person on the team and it falls apart.
I think you are correct with everything you said, but you're missing the most fundamental part of security as it's mostly practiced in the real world (there are some places where security is really taken seriously but they are extremely few.) The only thing that is important is the illusion of an extremely secure system. Most normal human beings would never tolerate any truly secure system as it would be too inconvenient to use.
I've been running a 3 monitor display (3 x 22" 1920x1080) for several years playing WOW, LOTRO, EVE, and BF3. The games look awesome covering all 3 screens, but it doesn't improve gameplay enough to make it worth my time. I typically play with the games windowed and maximized to a single screen. This lets me multi-box easily or play a game while watching a movie on another monitor.
I was going to suggest this also as it would be a great tribute to the late Ray Bradbury. I think censorship falls under the 4xx HTTP response codes given 410 Gone is for situations when the server's owner wants to remove a url "... The 410 response is primarily intended to assist the task of web maintenance by notifying the recipient that the resource is intentionally unavailable and that the server owners desire that remote links to that resource be removed..." If you take the definition of what a 410 error is and replace "server owners" with "government" it would be appropriate for censorship.
Slashdot Mirror
I think this is more just an indicator of mobile device usage. Apple's tooting their own horn, but I'm sure the android numbers are respectable which could mean closer to 65+ billion app downloads and growing at 2 billion+ a/month. The developer number is meaningless but makes Apple look charitable.
When I consider the communication skills myself, and most developers I know; we probably should work mastering communicating effectively in one spoken language first.
I think the Westboro Church is a bunch of insensitive asshole douche bags, however I don't think the answer is to form hate groups against the hate groups.
I salute you, noise is most likely the best way to protect yourself. I do the same from time to time also. My main point is the effective use of time, if you can easily be invisible by all means be invisible and I sincerely hope you can stay that way. But once the helicopter spot light is on you, it might not be worth the effort to get back into the shadows. But that is for each of us to decided.
They already have or can gain easy access to all that information. The govt already has a ton of info on you, tax records, dmv, etc. Business do also (you prolly get junk mail every day addressed to you.) It's a fact of life, it sucks, but thinking you can erase or hide your digital or paper trail is foolish. If you want to protect privacy spend your time fighting to protect it, don't waste it trying to hide.
There is a really good tech talk that touches on this. While McAfee seems to thinks this is a good thing, I believe it will most likely be a painful journey.
http://www.ted.com/talks/andrew_mcafee_are_droids_taking_our_jobs.html
with and using are excellent error handling mechanisms that have no clutter and clearly define the protected code. Most exception handling is little more than logging what went wrong since many exceptions really don't have solutions that can be coded for. The main thing we are trying to do in these situations is write out some data so we can debug and clean up any messes (open connections for example) we have laying around so the things don't get worse.
AWS seems like the real key to the success here, not the use of open source software. While I think it's great that NASA took the open source route, I've read nothing to defend the position that this would not have been successful with non-open source software:
"A traditional, proprietary approach would not have been this successful, given the short time to deployment and shifting requirements that necessitated the ultimate in agility and flexibility."
Even the article praises AWS more than the open source software mentioned, it's main source of content appears to come from the linked article with information about the open source pieces of the stack added.
The real problem is two things. People either not understanding the quality of the tools (software) they are using, or willingness to use "good enough" software and gamble against a catastrophe. Given the financial market's track record, it's most likely more of the second. If I have no idea about how to judge the ripeness of fruit and I make a pie that makes me sick because the apples were rotten, how can I blame the apples?
That being said, as a developer I can honestly say about 99% of the code I've seen is not Scottish. (It's CRAP!)
The real question should when should I use a SQL solution and when should I use a NoSQL solution, or more specifically which database should I use for project X. Neither one is better than the other, as each has a specific problem it attempts to solve. As a community we should spend more time discussing what make a technology the best solution for a specific problem-space, not having fan-boy wars.
So they want to hire the people that are currently at war with them. A good idea, but not very realistic.
Maybe they could try and pass some more laws like SOPA or dodge the democratic process with ACTA-like treaties and see if that drums up more recruits.
The people they will get will be the "retired," mediocre to average hackers who are now married and have too much too lose and can be bought with cool toys.
In the last 8 years as a developer, I've seen 2 types of "agile."
Agile Fail:
This is by far the most common type, where a trendy word is used to defend lack of project structure/discipline/planning. IMHO this is not too much better than waterfall in the end.
Agile Succeed:
I've seen this once. This requires an intelligent, experienced, and disciplined team the whole way through (devs, managers, sys admins, and yes client too.) This works because you have people with the intelligence to understand the core principles of "agile" and apply them correctly to the individual project; the experience to know what "just enough" means in terms of docs, structure, managing, etc; and discipline to strictly follow agreed upon (within the team) best practices and standards. This is an incredible way to work and we did amazing things; I do not expect I will see it again because one bad person on the team and it falls apart.
I think you are correct with everything you said, but you're missing the most fundamental part of security as it's mostly practiced in the real world (there are some places where security is really taken seriously but they are extremely few.) The only thing that is important is the illusion of an extremely secure system. Most normal human beings would never tolerate any truly secure system as it would be too inconvenient to use.
I've been running a 3 monitor display (3 x 22" 1920x1080) for several years playing WOW, LOTRO, EVE, and BF3. The games look awesome covering all 3 screens, but it doesn't improve gameplay enough to make it worth my time. I typically play with the games windowed and maximized to a single screen. This lets me multi-box easily or play a game while watching a movie on another monitor.
I was going to suggest this also as it would be a great tribute to the late Ray Bradbury. I think censorship falls under the 4xx HTTP response codes given 410 Gone is for situations when the server's owner wants to remove a url "... The 410 response is primarily intended to assist the task of web maintenance by notifying the recipient that the resource is intentionally unavailable and that the server owners desire that remote links to that resource be removed ..." If you take the definition of what a 410 error is and replace "server owners" with "government" it would be appropriate for censorship.