Yes...but... there is some truth to it. I did the math and with the loss of package deals buying into Sling (the other official services suck even more) with the package and the number of concurrent viewers I want I end up with around 15$ less....but no local channels which need to come in through rabbit ears. There is also a significant loss in convenience. Currently I have one cable box remote for everything. Without that service I'd need to get a remote for the PC or use a tablet for a Chromecast (which I have, but it is a crap device that often crashes for no reason) and either way end up juggling two remotes.
What is direly needed is a Sling ready small form factor system that can also work with other streaming and web TV services AND that has an ATSC tuner built in that has its signal seamlessly integrated in a decent UI like Sage TV (still bitter that it got killed off, best PC media center app ever).
After all that I'm no better off pricewise than with the current solution. The only difference is that my hard earned money goes into the accounts of a different company while risking the chance that the IP service provider gets crazy ideas like capping data rates, throttling, or abusing QoS to sabotage online TV streams.
Neat designers, but totally inept in execution. Cars are screwed together for over a century in mass production and they cannot figure it out? Totally pathetic!
After all, a majority voted that dictator and criminal into office....multiple times! So quit whining or step up and vote that entire group of thugs out. Although, it might need some different actions than participating at an election with stuffed ballot boxes and falsified results....like the Krim vote.
My suggestion is that in order to make Verizon happy the FCC mandates that all Internet providers are bound by the strongest and strictest privacy regulations, including any form of packet sniffing for any reason, any disclosure of information without explicit written consent for each desired share, and public quarterly reports by an independent third party on their efforts for protecting privacy. Any wrong doing comes with fines no less than 500,000$ and repeat offenders will be excluded indefinitely from doing business anywhere in the US.
I wonder what Verizon will write in response to that.
The problem is that there is not one RFC that defines an email address!! There is one that covers the top level domain (if present), one that covers the domain name (if present), and one that covers the account portion. There isn't even a mandate for the @ to be present as it is not needed when sending email within one domain. What makes matters worse is that there is no official standard. RFC means "request for comment", it is not a finalized standard. What makes it act like a standard is that everyone adheres to it so practically it doesn't matter if it is stuck in RFC status for eons.
This is why delivery dates ought to be set when things are guaranteed to exist. No matter how great of a devQA team you have, setting arbitrary release dates and expecting the feature wish list to be the definitive content will derail any project. This most likely happens when you promote developers to management positions.
Agile only encourages customers not to tell you what they want. It becomes perfectly acceptable that they change their minds constantly and sell it was "agile" and "iterative approach". Agile is awesome for all those who are too inept to make a decision.
So there is no budget for doing it right the first time, but there is budget for gluing together hot patches when stuff blows up in production? Any manager with that idea needs to be slapped with a wet noodle for days.
Yes, yes, yes! This is EXACTLY how stuff goes down. It takes quite some self-control not to punch those guys who claim that we will fix all of this later. Fixing it later will be much more difficult and thus cost more time and money.
Worst thing is to have a team only dedicated to bug fixes. Each developer needs to fix the own code and do so as soon as an issue is identified. Those devs who screw up a lot will then not deliver much in value and are very easy to identify. Give them extra training and monitor if they heard the warning shot.
I hope your are sarcastic. Scrum sucks! It adds so much overhead (that it claims to reduce!) that you need to hire a full time Scrum Master just to get the process working. If you want to do agile then hire polyvalent folks (means devs not too foo-foo to run a manual test and testers who have some idea how to code) and employ Kanban. Limit what everyone is working on and always keep the goal in mind to move tasks from backlog through design, dev, test to done as quickly as possible without shortcutting any of it. Instead of a Scrum Master hire a devops/deployment engineer who can push the bits to customers quickly. That way you can react fast if things don't pan out as expected in production.
Security is not impossible, but it costs time, money, and effort. Any product manager will rather have devs work on new features than fix existing ones for security or other problems. Customers also do not value quality and security enough that they are fine with getting a feature a bit later that is fully tested and fixed. Just look at mobile apps, every other day there are bug fix releases to download and still the apps crash every five minutes. It is clearly a cultural issue!
That is because security is a subset of quality and software companies rather hire more support staff than have devs fix bugs. If you love self-punishment and quixote-ian endeavors then enter QA. Every day I see the taps on the back of devs, but never in my 20 years of QA did anyone come by my desk and tell me I did a good job testing and making the company tons of money by keeping customer retention high. And yes, I still report the same errors made years ago and often it is the same dev making the same mistakes over and over again. Sadly, those guys get paid twice as much as I do.
Agreed, BUT the correct way typically is a bit more difficult, takes a bit more time, and thus costs more. Fast and cheap is preferred by most managers, good not so much.
I beg to differ. Experience level has little to do with it. As QA I worked with about a hundred developers over the years and they typically want to use the newest hipster libraries and crank out new features that dazzle top management. Security, bug fixing, sound architecture, and reliable frameworks are tedious work that do not demo well, which is why devs tend no to bother with it. I run tools checking for injections and XSS on every page that has a form, I report the results in great detail....and for the longest time none of this was fixed based on the argument that users will never enter a query or js code into a text field. Cue the company mandated security audit that the app blatantly failed and now out of a sudden this is top priority and front and center. So far nobody dared to ask why QA did not test for this and reported on these issues....
Let me put it bluntly: DEVELOPERS GO AND FIX THE BUGS THAT QA REPORTED!!!!!!!
Maybe...but this is what the arrogant folks at Mozilla should have done years ago. Now they try too little too late to fight the 70% user share gorilla. I'm not defending Chrome, everything Google comes with the big question mark of where each of the clicks and key presses will end up. The real kicker is that there is still not a single browser available that is fully standards compliant, has a real UI, and does not ape Chrome.
Throw all these electronic voting machines in the trash! Use paper ballots and a pen, stuff those in sealed envelopes, have voters drop those into sealed and transparent ballot boxes, seal the slot when voting is over, then bring all ballot boxes to the counting place and have the count be open to the public. Once counted compare votes cast with the number of people signing in at polling stations. Both numbers have to match. Keep the sign in lists and the ballots at least until the next election and put a single person in charge of safeguarding them.
It will not solve all problems, but it will solve many. It will cost more, but in exchange there can be as many recounts as needed, there is a paper trail, and stuffing the ballot boxes will not be as easy given that anyone can check on progress. With the sign in sheets retained it will even be possible to ask people if they voted or not. Low tech is in this case better than high tech. Sure, will take longer to get results, but I rather wait a day to get a reliable result than get a wrong or tampered result fast.
And while we are at it, get rid of the electoral college for presidential elections. It takes significant less votes to get a seat from Montana compared to one from Michigan. It will also remove the case where the candidate who received more votes loses the election. What kind of whacked up idea of democracy is that?
If using private email servers for government business equals prison time then Palin, D. Trump, Kushner, and I. Trump need to go to jail as well. They all used private or unsecured email servers for government business...although in regards to the Trump clan, government business is also their private business. The sole purpose of the Trump presidency is to gain more control, more money, and get away with more illegal activities.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes...but... there is some truth to it. I did the math and with the loss of package deals buying into Sling (the other official services suck even more) with the package and the number of concurrent viewers I want I end up with around 15$ less....but no local channels which need to come in through rabbit ears. There is also a significant loss in convenience. Currently I have one cable box remote for everything. Without that service I'd need to get a remote for the PC or use a tablet for a Chromecast (which I have, but it is a crap device that often crashes for no reason) and either way end up juggling two remotes. What is direly needed is a Sling ready small form factor system that can also work with other streaming and web TV services AND that has an ATSC tuner built in that has its signal seamlessly integrated in a decent UI like Sage TV (still bitter that it got killed off, best PC media center app ever). After all that I'm no better off pricewise than with the current solution. The only difference is that my hard earned money goes into the accounts of a different company while risking the chance that the IP service provider gets crazy ideas like capping data rates, throttling, or abusing QoS to sabotage online TV streams.
Neat designers, but totally inept in execution. Cars are screwed together for over a century in mass production and they cannot figure it out? Totally pathetic!
After all, a majority voted that dictator and criminal into office....multiple times! So quit whining or step up and vote that entire group of thugs out. Although, it might need some different actions than participating at an election with stuffed ballot boxes and falsified results....like the Krim vote.
Yep!
My suggestion is that in order to make Verizon happy the FCC mandates that all Internet providers are bound by the strongest and strictest privacy regulations, including any form of packet sniffing for any reason, any disclosure of information without explicit written consent for each desired share, and public quarterly reports by an independent third party on their efforts for protecting privacy. Any wrong doing comes with fines no less than 500,000$ and repeat offenders will be excluded indefinitely from doing business anywhere in the US. I wonder what Verizon will write in response to that.
Why are they scanning docs in the first place? Is that the price to pay for Google services?
Because all of the ones out there suck in varying degrees. Same with browsers and operating systems, they are all a crap fest.
Yep...and there is hardly anything that details how to test for such vulnerabilities!
The problem is that there is not one RFC that defines an email address!! There is one that covers the top level domain (if present), one that covers the domain name (if present), and one that covers the account portion. There isn't even a mandate for the @ to be present as it is not needed when sending email within one domain. What makes matters worse is that there is no official standard. RFC means "request for comment", it is not a finalized standard. What makes it act like a standard is that everyone adheres to it so practically it doesn't matter if it is stuck in RFC status for eons.
This is why delivery dates ought to be set when things are guaranteed to exist. No matter how great of a devQA team you have, setting arbitrary release dates and expecting the feature wish list to be the definitive content will derail any project. This most likely happens when you promote developers to management positions.
Agile only encourages customers not to tell you what they want. It becomes perfectly acceptable that they change their minds constantly and sell it was "agile" and "iterative approach". Agile is awesome for all those who are too inept to make a decision.
So there is no budget for doing it right the first time, but there is budget for gluing together hot patches when stuff blows up in production? Any manager with that idea needs to be slapped with a wet noodle for days.
Yes, yes, yes! This is EXACTLY how stuff goes down. It takes quite some self-control not to punch those guys who claim that we will fix all of this later. Fixing it later will be much more difficult and thus cost more time and money. Worst thing is to have a team only dedicated to bug fixes. Each developer needs to fix the own code and do so as soon as an issue is identified. Those devs who screw up a lot will then not deliver much in value and are very easy to identify. Give them extra training and monitor if they heard the warning shot.
I hope your are sarcastic. Scrum sucks! It adds so much overhead (that it claims to reduce!) that you need to hire a full time Scrum Master just to get the process working. If you want to do agile then hire polyvalent folks (means devs not too foo-foo to run a manual test and testers who have some idea how to code) and employ Kanban. Limit what everyone is working on and always keep the goal in mind to move tasks from backlog through design, dev, test to done as quickly as possible without shortcutting any of it. Instead of a Scrum Master hire a devops/deployment engineer who can push the bits to customers quickly. That way you can react fast if things don't pan out as expected in production.
Should have picked the example of the Therac-25. The Ariane incident was expensive fireworks, but no lives lost due to a software bug.
Security is not impossible, but it costs time, money, and effort. Any product manager will rather have devs work on new features than fix existing ones for security or other problems. Customers also do not value quality and security enough that they are fine with getting a feature a bit later that is fully tested and fixed. Just look at mobile apps, every other day there are bug fix releases to download and still the apps crash every five minutes. It is clearly a cultural issue!
That is because security is a subset of quality and software companies rather hire more support staff than have devs fix bugs. If you love self-punishment and quixote-ian endeavors then enter QA. Every day I see the taps on the back of devs, but never in my 20 years of QA did anyone come by my desk and tell me I did a good job testing and making the company tons of money by keeping customer retention high. And yes, I still report the same errors made years ago and often it is the same dev making the same mistakes over and over again. Sadly, those guys get paid twice as much as I do.
Agreed, BUT the correct way typically is a bit more difficult, takes a bit more time, and thus costs more. Fast and cheap is preferred by most managers, good not so much.
I beg to differ. Experience level has little to do with it. As QA I worked with about a hundred developers over the years and they typically want to use the newest hipster libraries and crank out new features that dazzle top management. Security, bug fixing, sound architecture, and reliable frameworks are tedious work that do not demo well, which is why devs tend no to bother with it. I run tools checking for injections and XSS on every page that has a form, I report the results in great detail....and for the longest time none of this was fixed based on the argument that users will never enter a query or js code into a text field. Cue the company mandated security audit that the app blatantly failed and now out of a sudden this is top priority and front and center. So far nobody dared to ask why QA did not test for this and reported on these issues....
Let me put it bluntly: DEVELOPERS GO AND FIX THE BUGS THAT QA REPORTED!!!!!!!
There are plenty of people who are not independently wealthy and can afford the grossly overpriced Apple hardware.
Maybe...but this is what the arrogant folks at Mozilla should have done years ago. Now they try too little too late to fight the 70% user share gorilla. I'm not defending Chrome, everything Google comes with the big question mark of where each of the clicks and key presses will end up. The real kicker is that there is still not a single browser available that is fully standards compliant, has a real UI, and does not ape Chrome.
....Krapersky still sucks. It is a performance killer and sends massive amounts of data to dubious servers.
Throw all these electronic voting machines in the trash! Use paper ballots and a pen, stuff those in sealed envelopes, have voters drop those into sealed and transparent ballot boxes, seal the slot when voting is over, then bring all ballot boxes to the counting place and have the count be open to the public. Once counted compare votes cast with the number of people signing in at polling stations. Both numbers have to match. Keep the sign in lists and the ballots at least until the next election and put a single person in charge of safeguarding them.
It will not solve all problems, but it will solve many. It will cost more, but in exchange there can be as many recounts as needed, there is a paper trail, and stuffing the ballot boxes will not be as easy given that anyone can check on progress. With the sign in sheets retained it will even be possible to ask people if they voted or not. Low tech is in this case better than high tech. Sure, will take longer to get results, but I rather wait a day to get a reliable result than get a wrong or tampered result fast.
And while we are at it, get rid of the electoral college for presidential elections. It takes significant less votes to get a seat from Montana compared to one from Michigan. It will also remove the case where the candidate who received more votes loses the election. What kind of whacked up idea of democracy is that?
Which morons are in the FCC? Those rules need to be stricter and limit how many stations one owner is allowed to have nationwide.
If using private email servers for government business equals prison time then Palin, D. Trump, Kushner, and I. Trump need to go to jail as well. They all used private or unsecured email servers for government business...although in regards to the Trump clan, government business is also their private business. The sole purpose of the Trump presidency is to gain more control, more money, and get away with more illegal activities.