Interview Questions
on
Network Warrior
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
After moving to a different state, the first interview I went on was with a larger company. After being a Windows/Mac admin (this is in the mid-90s) for a couple years, I was vaguely surprised that I knew the answer to almost none of their very obscure questions. I had been one of three administrators of a medium-sized WAN at my old job, and nothing they asked seemed relevant at all to real-world circumstances. Disappointed at my lack of knowledge (not to mention the fact I didn't get the job), I decided to study for the MCSE, as there was clearly stuff I didn't know.
To my surprise, every single one of their obscure, imaginary-world answers were straight from sample MCSE tests. And after 10 more years working in a mixed environment, those questions still don't apply.
Developing free software for their pay-for and ubiquitous operating system. If people can save money on cool software, maybe they won't mind the $10-$400 cost of Windows. AND, MS isn't paying the developers to write it. It's not just free marketing, it's free labor (in the Open Source sense of free).
My problem with a RealID vs what happens with a passport or drivers license currently:
1) Passport tracks you as you travel internationally. I can handle this. 2) Drivers license is used to "verify your identity or age" but this verification is not tracked.
RealID: I don't know for sure, of course, but I'd imagine for $14 billion dollars, everytime you're asked to flash your RealID, someone is there with a little machine that goes "BEEP" as it scans and logs your information, time, and location. I imagine a cross between the Minority Report where your RFID targets ads to you as you walk inside stores, and plainclothes agents walking up to you asking for your "Identification, please" whenever they feel like it, then scanning it.
I've got nothing to hide, I suppose. But it would take nothing at all to pin something on you by changing your data to make it look like you were someplace you were not. I'd be happier to just pay my taxes and be left alone, thanks.
The Lorentz Transformations, based on a geometrical theorem, basically force mass to go to infinity as one approaches the speed of light. The Special Theory of Relativity also claims that distances shorten as one approaches the speed of light. Taking a snapshot of a moving train will show that the entire length of the train has shortened by a miniscule amount (relative to the observer). Take this in reverse (as it's all relative) and a moving train's passenger sees people at the station get thinner.
Taken to an extreme, someone traveling very fast (99.999999%c) would reach his or her destination very quickly as the "view outside the window" would be shrunk so much (from their point of view). A photon, if you strapped a camera to it, would seem to teleport. To us, it still takes the photon 4 light years to get from Alpha Centauri to Earth, but to the photon, not even a blink passes.
That's this armchair physicist's interpretation anyway. Don't, err, reference me officially anywhere.:-)
I wonder what people expect to improve or be particularly innovative in software to make documents, spreadsheets, and presentations? The MS Office suite does it all and very well. A new document format that's more web and/or database friendly (ie XML)? A better user interface? More collaborative tools (like a checkout and versioning server included)?
The private companies that control our communications networks not only give the government whatever information it wants, they own a significant chunk of said government.
Your concerns about the government are valid, of course, but don't rule out what private corporations can do. I'm waiting for the day when committing misdemeanors affects your credit rating...
The information is made up of either old cases that have passed through the judicial process, or cases that are already in the judicial system and so subject to full disclosure to both defense and prosecution teams.
We had great leaders before we had TV debates and hair stylists.
Sorta made my point for me there.:-)
Anyway, who's to say Bush wasn't a great leader? He certainly managed to lead the U.S. into something, despite 1/2 of Americans and most of the free world being against him. Great leaders make people follow, great ideas not necessarily included.
What matters is what they propose, what they have done, and what they will do. Looks, Age, voice, style, I couldn't give a damn. the main job of a president or PM is to make the right decisions.
True enough, though any president or PM is relying heavily on research and advice from hundreds of other people. A leader needs to sound confident more than feel confident. His decisions are in the background and people feel the tremors of them, but when he or she stands at the podium and tells the people how things are going or why he's doing something, looks, timbre, and eyes do count. (See the Nixon vs Kennedy debate: TV-goers decided Kennedy won. Radio-listeners were for Nixon.)
Now there are lots of people with great ideas, but if you're too short, too heavy, don't look good in a suit...then you're already a step behind. People want heroic stature in their leaders. It's not mandatory and can be gleaned over by intelligence, humor, wise words. But it helps as it has always helped. Barak Obama is a good looking, well spoken guy, and it's not hurting him.
There's marketing. Say everything went Internet. No CDs anymore. You'd have sites that might tell you what the newest Pop song was, and you'd always have radio. But who's fronting the money for music videos, stadium concerts -- who is putting a face to the music so people can get ultra-famous and ultra-rich? "Making it" will mean you're on the radio collecting royalties or venues are seeking you out due to local fan opinion. But there will likely be no more megastars because there's no marketing team putting your image everywhere. And that's where the real money is spent.
I'm not saying there's not a way around that...people with enough royalties could purchase advertising, etc. But you know how much advertising costs. And if you start making deals with advertisers to give them a percentage of your income...well, then you're right back to the RIAA, but in this case it's the MMAA (Music Marketing Association of America).
I think the expression, "He can care less..." leaves the "...but I'm not sure about what" implied. Still a strange phrase, but I think that's the intended meaning. You're right to use "He couldn't care less" when trying to be clear. Or maybe just "He doesn't care" which equates to the same thing.
Sorry, but did you just say you can have something be both secure and convenient? I'd love to see an implementation like that because it's never been done in the history of all things.
Not so fast. When was the last time you locked the bathroom door?
Re:"The silent majority" is uninformed.
on
Storm Worm Rising
·
· Score: 1
With all the past outbreaks on Windows machines, anyone who wanted to migrate has already started their migration. This won't change anything for anyone else.
Response: That's just silly. People have different convincer strategies. If nothing else, there are people out there who still haven't heard that there's an alternative. There's a lot of meat left on that bone.
True. I'd say the long, dark tunnel from XP to Vista has a few side corridors.
I think we'll find, or at least I'm hoping this will be the situation in the future, that we will be able to decide things on a case-by-case basis. Sure I unselected extreme sport coverage, but then I go try the halfpipe at Tahoe on my snowboard and break my arm on a not-so-aggro landing. I can show that I am not an extreme sport enthusiast. I just tried it that day and now, I don't have any interest in trying again, and if I'm injured in X amount of time, my coverage has "extreme sports" added to it.
Information transfer should make this easier. I could lie of course and claim privacy concerns, but I'm disadvantaging myself in my argument for coverage: the default assumption is that I went outside my coverage, if I want to have them give me "free money", I need to show that's not the case.
I follow you, just making a joke. I believe that when filling in insurance forms, there are changes if your family has a history, or if you lead an unhealthy or dangerous lifestyle. One thing you might see to curtail generic rising charges, is selective policies:
I want to be insured for:
1) Accidental injuries incurred by non-dangerous activities (driving, swimming, non-extreme sports) 2) Cancer not directly related to my own activities (colon, prostate, lymph node)
I don't want to be insured for:
1) Extreme sports such as race car driving, motocross, ski jumping. 2) Cancer due to smoking 3) Liver failure due to alcoholic consumption
She could also be right to say not exhale in the vaccuum. If you open your air passage, the air could be sucked out, possibly collapsing your lungs. Lungs aren't just big sacks though...more like sponges. She should've specified not to inhale before though, else you run into that ballooning lung problem. I did like that part of the episode though, close to fact or not.
What about sexually promiscuous employees, or employees that like skydiving or downhill skiing? What about employees that pop too many aspirin, or employees with physically abusive spouses? What about those employees with genetic predispositions to any number of chronic (read: EXPENSIVE) diseases, who have thus far been lucky enough not to come down with them (so far)?
World wasn't invented in a day, boy. Simmer down. They'll get to it.
You seem a little...tense. MIT beat you on the Charles or something? But no, I went to school in the other direction...T-U-F-T-S, hurrah hurrah for the dear old brown and blue up on the hill hill hill! The fight song is definitely NOT a marvel of anything, I have to say, other than, perhaps, to make people laugh when you tell them that was your fight song. If I had gone to MIT though, I'd be just as content. Not sure what their fight song is though...
Read up on the Big Dig...it is a marvel and a clusterfuck both. Hardly mutually exclusive those. I think only one tile fell (albeit it killed who it fell on) but I know that, if I visited Boston again, I wouldn't want to be stopped in traffic in the Dig tunnel.
The free market does not always sort itself out. If it did, why does everyone still use Windows?
People started using Windows because it had a useful GUI and wasn't run on proprietary hardware like MacOS. People continue to use Windows based on the user-base: there are more programs written for Windows than for any other operating system, and these programs are both advanced and user-friendly. MacOS X is doing well but has the proprietary hardware thing going again. Apple's marketing team is doing wonders.
Linux on the desktop is much better than it was even 2 years ago, but for the average consumer, it is much more difficult to overcome even simple problems than with Windows. Also, the Linux marketing team...well, there really isn't one. At least not one that pays for TV timeslots which is where the masses would end up seeing it. Linux is claiming users about as fast as can be expected.
And I agree about pirated vs protected. If "it doesn't work" is synonymous with "protected" than the powers have a problem. I don't mind paying for music and I haven't downloaded a song without paying since...I dunno...1999....but once I have the song, I should be able to play it anywhere that is considered "mine".
Subscriptions? Sure. That's what cable is (though honestly, for the 3 shows I watch, I'd just as soon pay by the episode). But they should be "household" subscriptions, not personal ones.
Honestly, maybe the recording industry should stop selling CDs and only allow streaming music from the internet and radio. Sure people could capture the streams, but most wouldn't bother...they'd just use their wifi-enabled iPod to play back their online playlist. If you're in an area without wifi...maybe 3G enable the iPod....No 3G? Try one of those old fashioned walk-around CD players that might still work.
What I would like to see is certain terms very, very clearly defined.
What I'd like to see is people relax a little bit. The reality is that, even if the tech was there to could charge people per media exchange, you likely wouldn't be earning any more money: you'd be out of customers. Even sheep know when the water's too cold to cross. Couch potatoes will eventually look at their $100/month flat cable bill coupled with $290 in transfer charges of music and TV programs from one media center to another, and say: let's go throw the frisbee.
Nickel and dimeing your customers has never been accepted practice. Hence text message plans rather than pay per message with cell phones. And you've already paid for the songs and programs you're watching. They could just raise the price, but realize that if they charge you here or there, then you think it's okay as long as they don't raise your monthly cable bill. You'll get a Media Transfer Bill which is different.
Which is bullshit.
People don't have to expect money from you for every thing you do. Just say no to them. If they change the rules, talk to someone who can change them back, or stop using their product.
It's almost degrading to women that people keep bringing this stuff up. Condescending might be the right word. Like when someone feels the need to comment about how well Colin Powell speaks. There's an unspoken 'and he's black' that is left hanging for the listener to fill in by themselves.
In Engineering at a university down the road from Harvard, my only female engineering/math/physics teacher was for Statics. She was also one of the early lead engineers for the Big Dig (a marvel of engineering, despite its flaws).
The thing with Colin Powell is that you expect either rambling bluster a la most politicians (he's more of a statesman though), or a James Earl Jones bass voice. Instead, he has this nice tenor voice delivering complete sentences. It's a rarity in the human race, especially with government and military figures, to have a voice and demeanor that gives the appearance of thoughtfulness. It's why people would vote for him if he ran for public office.
For better or for worse, the consideration of having children does not include money. Money just comes: from the government, from the grandparents, from other relatives. You can call it a drain on public resources, but eventually this child pays taxes (hopefully). And adds other things to the world.
Read his remark: "it would be an incredible experiment to shut down the whole internet for five years and see what sort of art is produced over that span." Do you think that's a serious call to shut down the Internet?
It might be a great experiment to remove copyright, makes songs free on the Internet, and have musicians only make money by performing. Musicians would be a lot poorer, but the listeners might find more music to listen to.
Difference?
on
Blue Blu-ray
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Without looking at the tubes, I've been curious (not too) about the end user functional difference between blu-ray and HD-DVD (aside from one having fewer syllables). Is it like buying a red porsche cayenne or a blue porsche cayenne? I'm not sure how two devices can compete with each other if they are essentially the same. Will their market lifetime boil down to non-technical reasons, as stated in the article? Is there some nifty upgrade path that one allows over the other?
Slashdot Mirror
After moving to a different state, the first interview I went on was with a larger company. After being a Windows/Mac admin (this is in the mid-90s) for a couple years, I was vaguely surprised that I knew the answer to almost none of their very obscure questions. I had been one of three administrators of a medium-sized WAN at my old job, and nothing they asked seemed relevant at all to real-world circumstances. Disappointed at my lack of knowledge (not to mention the fact I didn't get the job), I decided to study for the MCSE, as there was clearly stuff I didn't know.
To my surprise, every single one of their obscure, imaginary-world answers were straight from sample MCSE tests. And after 10 more years working in a mixed environment, those questions still don't apply.
Developing free software for their pay-for and ubiquitous operating system. If people can save money on cool software, maybe they won't mind the $10-$400 cost of Windows. AND, MS isn't paying the developers to write it. It's not just free marketing, it's free labor (in the Open Source sense of free).
My problem with a RealID vs what happens with a passport or drivers license currently:
1) Passport tracks you as you travel internationally. I can handle this.
2) Drivers license is used to "verify your identity or age" but this verification is not tracked.
RealID: I don't know for sure, of course, but I'd imagine for $14 billion dollars, everytime you're asked to flash your RealID, someone is there with a little machine that goes "BEEP" as it scans and logs your information, time, and location. I imagine a cross between the Minority Report where your RFID targets ads to you as you walk inside stores, and plainclothes agents walking up to you asking for your "Identification, please" whenever they feel like it, then scanning it.
I've got nothing to hide, I suppose. But it would take nothing at all to pin something on you by changing your data to make it look like you were someplace you were not. I'd be happier to just pay my taxes and be left alone, thanks.
The Lorentz Transformations, based on a geometrical theorem, basically force mass to go to infinity as one approaches the speed of light. The Special Theory of Relativity also claims that distances shorten as one approaches the speed of light. Taking a snapshot of a moving train will show that the entire length of the train has shortened by a miniscule amount (relative to the observer). Take this in reverse (as it's all relative) and a moving train's passenger sees people at the station get thinner.
:-)
Taken to an extreme, someone traveling very fast (99.999999%c) would reach his or her destination very quickly as the "view outside the window" would be shrunk so much (from their point of view). A photon, if you strapped a camera to it, would seem to teleport. To us, it still takes the photon 4 light years to get from Alpha Centauri to Earth, but to the photon, not even a blink passes.
That's this armchair physicist's interpretation anyway. Don't, err, reference me officially anywhere.
I wonder what people expect to improve or be particularly innovative in software to make documents, spreadsheets, and presentations? The MS Office suite does it all and very well. A new document format that's more web and/or database friendly (ie XML)? A better user interface? More collaborative tools (like a checkout and versioning server included)?
The private companies that control our communications networks not only give the government whatever information it wants, they own a significant chunk of said government.
Your concerns about the government are valid, of course, but don't rule out what private corporations can do. I'm waiting for the day when committing misdemeanors affects your credit rating...
I didn't think we'd all turn out to be illegal immigrants...
The information is made up of either old cases that have passed through the judicial process, or cases that are already in the judicial system and so subject to full disclosure to both defense and prosecution teams.
So...not top secret then.
We had great leaders before we had TV debates and hair stylists.
:-)
Sorta made my point for me there.
Anyway, who's to say Bush wasn't a great leader? He certainly managed to lead the U.S. into something, despite 1/2 of Americans and most of the free world being against him. Great leaders make people follow, great ideas not necessarily included.
What matters is what they propose, what they have done, and what they will do. Looks, Age, voice, style, I couldn't give a damn. the main job of a president or PM is to make the right decisions.
True enough, though any president or PM is relying heavily on research and advice from hundreds of other people. A leader needs to sound confident more than feel confident. His decisions are in the background and people feel the tremors of them, but when he or she stands at the podium and tells the people how things are going or why he's doing something, looks, timbre, and eyes do count. (See the Nixon vs Kennedy debate: TV-goers decided Kennedy won. Radio-listeners were for Nixon.)
Now there are lots of people with great ideas, but if you're too short, too heavy, don't look good in a suit...then you're already a step behind. People want heroic stature in their leaders. It's not mandatory and can be gleaned over by intelligence, humor, wise words. But it helps as it has always helped. Barak Obama is a good looking, well spoken guy, and it's not hurting him.
There's marketing. Say everything went Internet. No CDs anymore. You'd have sites that might tell you what the newest Pop song was, and you'd always have radio. But who's fronting the money for music videos, stadium concerts -- who is putting a face to the music so people can get ultra-famous and ultra-rich? "Making it" will mean you're on the radio collecting royalties or venues are seeking you out due to local fan opinion. But there will likely be no more megastars because there's no marketing team putting your image everywhere. And that's where the real money is spent.
I'm not saying there's not a way around that...people with enough royalties could purchase advertising, etc. But you know how much advertising costs. And if you start making deals with advertisers to give them a percentage of your income...well, then you're right back to the RIAA, but in this case it's the MMAA (Music Marketing Association of America).
I think the expression, "He can care less..." leaves the "...but I'm not sure about what" implied. Still a strange phrase, but I think that's the intended meaning. You're right to use "He couldn't care less" when trying to be clear. Or maybe just "He doesn't care" which equates to the same thing.
Sorry, but did you just say you can have something be both secure and convenient? I'd love to see an implementation like that because it's never been done in the history of all things.
Not so fast. When was the last time you locked the bathroom door?
With all the past outbreaks on Windows machines, anyone who wanted to migrate has already started their migration. This won't change anything for anyone else.
Response: That's just silly. People have different convincer strategies. If nothing else, there are people out there who still haven't heard that there's an alternative. There's a lot of meat left on that bone.
True. I'd say the long, dark tunnel from XP to Vista has a few side corridors.
I think we'll find, or at least I'm hoping this will be the situation in the future, that we will be able to decide things on a case-by-case basis. Sure I unselected extreme sport coverage, but then I go try the halfpipe at Tahoe on my snowboard and break my arm on a not-so-aggro landing. I can show that I am not an extreme sport enthusiast. I just tried it that day and now, I don't have any interest in trying again, and if I'm injured in X amount of time, my coverage has "extreme sports" added to it.
Information transfer should make this easier. I could lie of course and claim privacy concerns, but I'm disadvantaging myself in my argument for coverage: the default assumption is that I went outside my coverage, if I want to have them give me "free money", I need to show that's not the case.
I follow you, just making a joke. I believe that when filling in insurance forms, there are changes if your family has a history, or if you lead an unhealthy or dangerous lifestyle. One thing you might see to curtail generic rising charges, is selective policies:
I want to be insured for:
1) Accidental injuries incurred by non-dangerous activities (driving, swimming, non-extreme sports)
2) Cancer not directly related to my own activities (colon, prostate, lymph node)
I don't want to be insured for:
1) Extreme sports such as race car driving, motocross, ski jumping.
2) Cancer due to smoking
3) Liver failure due to alcoholic consumption
You start with a flat rate and go up from there.
She could also be right to say not exhale in the vaccuum. If you open your air passage, the air could be sucked out, possibly collapsing your lungs. Lungs aren't just big sacks though...more like sponges. She should've specified not to inhale before though, else you run into that ballooning lung problem. I did like that part of the episode though, close to fact or not.
What about sexually promiscuous employees, or employees that like skydiving or downhill skiing? What about employees that pop too many aspirin, or employees with physically abusive spouses? What about those employees with genetic predispositions to any number of chronic (read: EXPENSIVE) diseases, who have thus far been lucky enough not to come down with them (so far)?
World wasn't invented in a day, boy. Simmer down. They'll get to it.
You seem a little...tense. MIT beat you on the Charles or something? But no, I went to school in the other direction...T-U-F-T-S, hurrah hurrah for the dear old brown and blue up on the hill hill hill! The fight song is definitely NOT a marvel of anything, I have to say, other than, perhaps, to make people laugh when you tell them that was your fight song. If I had gone to MIT though, I'd be just as content. Not sure what their fight song is though...
Read up on the Big Dig...it is a marvel and a clusterfuck both. Hardly mutually exclusive those. I think only one tile fell (albeit it killed who it fell on) but I know that, if I visited Boston again, I wouldn't want to be stopped in traffic in the Dig tunnel.
The free market does not always sort itself out. If it did, why does everyone still use Windows?
People started using Windows because it had a useful GUI and wasn't run on proprietary hardware like MacOS. People continue to use Windows based on the user-base: there are more programs written for Windows than for any other operating system, and these programs are both advanced and user-friendly. MacOS X is doing well but has the proprietary hardware thing going again. Apple's marketing team is doing wonders.
Linux on the desktop is much better than it was even 2 years ago, but for the average consumer, it is much more difficult to overcome even simple problems than with Windows. Also, the Linux marketing team...well, there really isn't one. At least not one that pays for TV timeslots which is where the masses would end up seeing it. Linux is claiming users about as fast as can be expected.
And I agree about pirated vs protected. If "it doesn't work" is synonymous with "protected" than the powers have a problem. I don't mind paying for music and I haven't downloaded a song without paying since...I dunno...1999....but once I have the song, I should be able to play it anywhere that is considered "mine".
Subscriptions? Sure. That's what cable is (though honestly, for the 3 shows I watch, I'd just as soon pay by the episode). But they should be "household" subscriptions, not personal ones.
Honestly, maybe the recording industry should stop selling CDs and only allow streaming music from the internet and radio. Sure people could capture the streams, but most wouldn't bother...they'd just use their wifi-enabled iPod to play back their online playlist. If you're in an area without wifi...maybe 3G enable the iPod....No 3G? Try one of those old fashioned walk-around CD players that might still work.
What I would like to see is certain terms very, very clearly defined.
What I'd like to see is people relax a little bit. The reality is that, even if the tech was there to could charge people per media exchange, you likely wouldn't be earning any more money: you'd be out of customers. Even sheep know when the water's too cold to cross. Couch potatoes will eventually look at their $100/month flat cable bill coupled with $290 in transfer charges of music and TV programs from one media center to another, and say: let's go throw the frisbee.
Nickel and dimeing your customers has never been accepted practice. Hence text message plans rather than pay per message with cell phones. And you've already paid for the songs and programs you're watching. They could just raise the price, but realize that if they charge you here or there, then you think it's okay as long as they don't raise your monthly cable bill. You'll get a Media Transfer Bill which is different.
Which is bullshit.
People don't have to expect money from you for every thing you do. Just say no to them. If they change the rules, talk to someone who can change them back, or stop using their product.
It's almost degrading to women that people keep bringing this stuff up. Condescending might be the right word. Like when someone feels the need to comment about how well Colin Powell speaks. There's an unspoken 'and he's black' that is left hanging for the listener to fill in by themselves.
In Engineering at a university down the road from Harvard, my only female engineering/math/physics teacher was for Statics. She was also one of the early lead engineers for the Big Dig (a marvel of engineering, despite its flaws).
The thing with Colin Powell is that you expect either rambling bluster a la most politicians (he's more of a statesman though), or a James Earl Jones bass voice. Instead, he has this nice tenor voice delivering complete sentences. It's a rarity in the human race, especially with government and military figures, to have a voice and demeanor that gives the appearance of thoughtfulness. It's why people would vote for him if he ran for public office.
"Those people cannot afford children."
For better or for worse, the consideration of having children does not include money. Money just comes: from the government, from the grandparents, from other relatives. You can call it a drain on public resources, but eventually this child pays taxes (hopefully). And adds other things to the world.
Read his remark: "it would be an incredible experiment to shut down the whole internet for five years and see what sort of art is produced over that span." Do you think that's a serious call to shut down the Internet?
It might be a great experiment to remove copyright, makes songs free on the Internet, and have musicians only make money by performing. Musicians would be a lot poorer, but the listeners might find more music to listen to.
Without looking at the tubes, I've been curious (not too) about the end user functional difference between blu-ray and HD-DVD (aside from one having fewer syllables). Is it like buying a red porsche cayenne or a blue porsche cayenne? I'm not sure how two devices can compete with each other if they are essentially the same. Will their market lifetime boil down to non-technical reasons, as stated in the article? Is there some nifty upgrade path that one allows over the other?