Only to a certain extent. When you apply "lean principles" (google it) you simultaneously increase productivity AND quality. The practice behind lean principles is the following:
- Always look for ways that you can reduce the number of manual steps in manufacturing - Fewer manual steps means fewer incidence of human error, leading to lower defect rate (a defect is defined as anything that negatively impacts customer perception of the product) leading to higher quality - Time to production is reduced, human labor cost is reduced and/or labor time is free for other tasks, such as increased output - Price is reduced
If you're less productive then it means your costs are invariably higher than somebody else, including other countries with even higher cost of labor. That means you're going to have a harder time competing on product pricing. It also means that in the event of a labor shortage, your aggregate product output will be markedly reduced compared to your competitors, and the only way to improve is to improve productivity.
No, you can't. For example, France is demanding that Twitter turn over information about people who tweeted "hate speech" so that it could prosecute them:
The concept of "encryption as munitions" concept fell apart when Phil Zimmerman made the point that he could print the PGP source code in a book and send it overseas. Politicians at the time didn't understand why code could be considered speech, until they realized that it could be in book form, which already had a long established first amendment protection.
I have about 8tb worth of movies and tv shows on my nas and was considering doing exactly this. I guess it's a good thing this happened before I started stitching together a hack to make this work with Ubuntu server.
There is a huge disconnect here, and while it is easy to describe this as simple hypocrisy, unless the KKK were implicated in some recent crimes, this is essentially thought policing.
In other words, if you say something that somebody doesn't like, it's acceptable for them to rummage through your computer and your house and air your dirty laundry to the public, just because they aren't the government? Because this is what you're advocating against the KKK. Sure, your unpopular opinion might be different, but other than that the circumstances are identical.
Not only that, but the 4th amendment doesn't specify that the government isn't allowed to do it, that's only the first amendment.
Many people talk about the 1st in relation to the KKK. But also consider the 4th. You are basically taking it upon yourself to rifle thru their personal papers to dig up dirt. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... In fact the 4th was designed to blunt exactly these sorts of lynch mob tactics under the color of law. We as a country used to take these things seriously. For example opening someones mail carries a massive penalty and fine.
Exactly this. Unless hacktivists and hacktivist supporters think that it would be a good idea to one day give the police the ability to ignore the 4th, then they shouldn't do it either.
In the case of ISIS, I can understand because they've already long since provided justification for doing this (which the 4th amendment specifies) but as for the KKK, with as much as I don't like them either, I don't see a justification for this.
A fundamental problem I have with this, especially hacktivism in general, is that these people are doing things that they themselves wouldn't like the police to be doing. If you wouldn't support the police hacking into the systems of people saying things that are unpopular, then why would you support anonymous doing it? Likewise, DDoSing websites is censorship by every definition of the word, I don't care what purpose the website serves (be it commercial or not.)
Maybe in some situations, censorship is acceptable in Europe, but not here, not with the first amendment.
Uhh that seems unrelated. These ppl are assholes who harrass/intimidate/etc others using their privacy.
Why? It's one thing if they're a terrorist organization, but it's a whole other thing if they're just groveling among themselves about how much they hate x. Unless you can prove somebody has done something beyond simply being bigoted, then doxing them is an evil thing to do.
These aren't politicians. But politician or not, outing somebody for stating any opinion at all definitely a chilling effect on free speech.
I myself hold the opinion that people cannot come anywhere close to changing their biological sex at any point past conception. It's an unpopular opinion, but there's zero justification to try to get me fired over it or have people showing up my house and harass me over it.
Actually its creator wasn't that great. TNG seasons 1 and 2 were kinda bad, and those were the only two seasons that he had a heavy influence. After that, the writers started breaking some of the rules that Roddenberry had established for the series.
The situation you described is an example of "Linux Admins"... I.E random people who installed calling themselves admins and then your dumbass hired the clueless wastes.
I've never hired anybody as I'm not a manager. However this is MY policy for systems under MY watch, and I don't ask other people to do the same thing. If a disaster happens, I want somebody to be able to recover MY systems without needing to so much as give me a phone call or look up any documentations; i.e. when they turn it on, they can expect it to just start working on its own. We get more uptime that way.
You seem to be arguing that if YOU do everything then you don't have problems with other admins.
This a problem with you and your inability to manage or work with a team. In short, your just a clueless shitty admin that thinks this half assed method to obscure the system to the point that no one else wants to touch it is a good thing.
Umm...no. I still document anyways so that people can figure out how I set up x, configured y, and troubleshot z, which is fine during normal operation. My build docs actually closely resemble a bash script, so it's easy for any Linux admin to follow them; if you were to read them you'd know EXACTLY how I built my servers, I even document things like bios changes, special drivers needed, what version of what distro, etc. One time I had a network KVM adapter that caused the kernel to not boot, so I even included detailed instructions of how to adjust the grub parameters in the documentation.
You seem to be arguing that if YOU do everything then you don't have problems with other admins.
By doing what I'm doing, I also keep my team's burdens at a minimum, so yes, I think I'm being quite a good team player here as well.
I keep the systems configured so that in the event of a complete power outage, EVERYTHING must come back up without any intervention required. This is saves a lot of explaining when it's time to put out a fire and -- oh shit, the admin forgot to document how to get everything back up and running when somebody crashed their car into a nearby transformer and the UPS failed to signal the diesel generator to start, and now we're spending 3 days trying to get shit working again because the guy who set it all up quit about 5 months earlier. (Yes, I've seen exactly this happen before.)
The reboots are only necessary when testing changes to make sure that everything comes up the way it's supposed to in the event of a total loss of power. Sometimes this doesn't happen (for example, a new kernel image breaks ZoL, so after the reboot the array doesn't get mounted) and it might take multiple reboots before you've got it all set.
I think it's just because they don't like ecosystem competitors. Reason I say that is because they don't seem to have taken any action against any video players other than Chromecast, Nexus Player, or Apple TV. You can still buy an Nvidia shield, which does basically the same thing as Nexus Player. The only reason Roku is still available is because their installed base is simply too big for Amazon to ignore, so Amazon is already paying them anyways.
Although I have Amazon Prime, I got so annoyed with the "this is free but this isn't" mentality that I just stopped using it entirely. When I first bought a Fire TV, I returned it because the main users (my parents) kept thinking they needed to pay for everything because Amazon displays their content front and center while never showing Netflix in its search results, which makes Roku a better choice (i.e. when you search for something in a Roku, it will show you which of your providers have it and how much it costs to watch; Netflix always being free.)
Slashdot Mirror
Or you could simply lead with quality
Only to a certain extent. When you apply "lean principles" (google it) you simultaneously increase productivity AND quality. The practice behind lean principles is the following:
- Always look for ways that you can reduce the number of manual steps in manufacturing
- Fewer manual steps means fewer incidence of human error, leading to lower defect rate (a defect is defined as anything that negatively impacts customer perception of the product) leading to higher quality
- Time to production is reduced, human labor cost is reduced and/or labor time is free for other tasks, such as increased output
- Price is reduced
If you're less productive then it means your costs are invariably higher than somebody else, including other countries with even higher cost of labor. That means you're going to have a harder time competing on product pricing. It also means that in the event of a labor shortage, your aggregate product output will be markedly reduced compared to your competitors, and the only way to improve is to improve productivity.
No, you can't. For example, France is demanding that Twitter turn over information about people who tweeted "hate speech" so that it could prosecute them:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07...
A tweet is nothing more than speech, and the "speech crimes" that France is pursuing were:
- Anti-semitic comments
- Holocaust denial (this is actually illegal throughout Europe, not just Germany)
- Denigrating muslims
Even if you call this one an exception, I can find countless others, and for practically every country in Europe.
The concept of "encryption as munitions" concept fell apart when Phil Zimmerman made the point that he could print the PGP source code in a book and send it overseas. Politicians at the time didn't understand why code could be considered speech, until they realized that it could be in book form, which already had a long established first amendment protection.
I have about 8tb worth of movies and tv shows on my nas and was considering doing exactly this. I guess it's a good thing this happened before I started stitching together a hack to make this work with Ubuntu server.
There is a huge disconnect here, and while it is easy to describe this as simple hypocrisy, unless the KKK were implicated in some recent crimes, this is essentially thought policing.
That's EXACTLY what it is.
Which is why we hold them accountable when they do. Granted, the NSA hasn't been held accountable yet, I don't think that will last forever.
In other words, if you say something that somebody doesn't like, it's acceptable for them to rummage through your computer and your house and air your dirty laundry to the public, just because they aren't the government? Because this is what you're advocating against the KKK. Sure, your unpopular opinion might be different, but other than that the circumstances are identical.
Not only that, but the 4th amendment doesn't specify that the government isn't allowed to do it, that's only the first amendment.
Many people talk about the 1st in relation to the KKK. But also consider the 4th. You are basically taking it upon yourself to rifle thru their personal papers to dig up dirt. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
In fact the 4th was designed to blunt exactly these sorts of lynch mob tactics under the color of law. We as a country used to take these things seriously. For example opening someones mail carries a massive penalty and fine.
Exactly this. Unless hacktivists and hacktivist supporters think that it would be a good idea to one day give the police the ability to ignore the 4th, then they shouldn't do it either.
In the case of ISIS, I can understand because they've already long since provided justification for doing this (which the 4th amendment specifies) but as for the KKK, with as much as I don't like them either, I don't see a justification for this.
There are a lot of examples, such as it being illegal to bear a swaztika in Germany.
A fundamental problem I have with this, especially hacktivism in general, is that these people are doing things that they themselves wouldn't like the police to be doing. If you wouldn't support the police hacking into the systems of people saying things that are unpopular, then why would you support anonymous doing it? Likewise, DDoSing websites is censorship by every definition of the word, I don't care what purpose the website serves (be it commercial or not.)
Maybe in some situations, censorship is acceptable in Europe, but not here, not with the first amendment.
Uhh that seems unrelated. These ppl are assholes who harrass/intimidate/etc others using their privacy.
Why? It's one thing if they're a terrorist organization, but it's a whole other thing if they're just groveling among themselves about how much they hate x. Unless you can prove somebody has done something beyond simply being bigoted, then doxing them is an evil thing to do.
You think you want to know the truth...but you don't. It's worse than anything you could even imagine.
These aren't politicians. But politician or not, outing somebody for stating any opinion at all definitely a chilling effect on free speech.
I myself hold the opinion that people cannot come anywhere close to changing their biological sex at any point past conception. It's an unpopular opinion, but there's zero justification to try to get me fired over it or have people showing up my house and harass me over it.
Well sickbeard has been my conventional method for 5 years now. Are you saying that I won't be able to get it on sickbeard?
Actually its creator wasn't that great. TNG seasons 1 and 2 were kinda bad, and those were the only two seasons that he had a heavy influence. After that, the writers started breaking some of the rules that Roddenberry had established for the series.
So systemd is insidiously taking over the world while the majority are unaware?
No, just people who actually celebrate All Saints Day spell it that way.
Bill Gates never said that either.
http://www.computerworld.com/a...
I don't know because I didn't hire any of them. I'm not in any kind of management or supervisory role.
But still, I like to keep maintenance time to a minimum. Systemd's fast boot time helps with that a great deal.
The situation you described is an example of "Linux Admins" ... I.E random people who installed calling themselves admins and then your dumbass hired the clueless wastes.
I've never hired anybody as I'm not a manager. However this is MY policy for systems under MY watch, and I don't ask other people to do the same thing. If a disaster happens, I want somebody to be able to recover MY systems without needing to so much as give me a phone call or look up any documentations; i.e. when they turn it on, they can expect it to just start working on its own. We get more uptime that way.
You seem to be arguing that if YOU do everything then you don't have problems with other admins.
This a problem with you and your inability to manage or work with a team. In short, your just a clueless shitty admin that thinks this half assed method to obscure the system to the point that no one else wants to touch it is a good thing.
Umm...no. I still document anyways so that people can figure out how I set up x, configured y, and troubleshot z, which is fine during normal operation. My build docs actually closely resemble a bash script, so it's easy for any Linux admin to follow them; if you were to read them you'd know EXACTLY how I built my servers, I even document things like bios changes, special drivers needed, what version of what distro, etc. One time I had a network KVM adapter that caused the kernel to not boot, so I even included detailed instructions of how to adjust the grub parameters in the documentation.
You seem to be arguing that if YOU do everything then you don't have problems with other admins.
By doing what I'm doing, I also keep my team's burdens at a minimum, so yes, I think I'm being quite a good team player here as well.
Neither can any encryption tool that you haven't personally audited line by line.
That's not what it's for. See my above post.
I keep the systems configured so that in the event of a complete power outage, EVERYTHING must come back up without any intervention required. This is saves a lot of explaining when it's time to put out a fire and -- oh shit, the admin forgot to document how to get everything back up and running when somebody crashed their car into a nearby transformer and the UPS failed to signal the diesel generator to start, and now we're spending 3 days trying to get shit working again because the guy who set it all up quit about 5 months earlier. (Yes, I've seen exactly this happen before.)
The reboots are only necessary when testing changes to make sure that everything comes up the way it's supposed to in the event of a total loss of power. Sometimes this doesn't happen (for example, a new kernel image breaks ZoL, so after the reboot the array doesn't get mounted) and it might take multiple reboots before you've got it all set.
I think it's just because they don't like ecosystem competitors. Reason I say that is because they don't seem to have taken any action against any video players other than Chromecast, Nexus Player, or Apple TV. You can still buy an Nvidia shield, which does basically the same thing as Nexus Player. The only reason Roku is still available is because their installed base is simply too big for Amazon to ignore, so Amazon is already paying them anyways.
Although I have Amazon Prime, I got so annoyed with the "this is free but this isn't" mentality that I just stopped using it entirely. When I first bought a Fire TV, I returned it because the main users (my parents) kept thinking they needed to pay for everything because Amazon displays their content front and center while never showing Netflix in its search results, which makes Roku a better choice (i.e. when you search for something in a Roku, it will show you which of your providers have it and how much it costs to watch; Netflix always being free.)