I have multiple children, which is the definition of "context switching" and "inability to focus" as well as increased work, so I definitely work less efficiently (and have more work) than when I was single.
I wanted to sleep late. But you know what I did instead? I got up, made breakfast, did laundry, cut the grass, replaced a faucet, pressed and folded said laundry and then cleaned the kitchen. Oh, some days I also try to learn more computing languages on my own time because I can't do that on work time, can I?
I resent the idea that the only thing separating my kids from a deep and abiding interest in all things science is if I only worked a little harder and got my lazy hiney out of bed earlier.
If the Gates foundation arranged for the above to happen every week for me (*cough*), I'd be ecstatic to create cool science experiments for my kids instead. Deal?
1. Deny the validity of the law on its face, but accept the consequences of "breaking the law" until the law itself could be changed? 2. Get upset at the inconvenience of being arrested, tried, all for something that "wasn't breaking the law, so why arrest me in the first place?"
Right, because another requirement/standard will solve this problem. It will get tossed on the pile of requirements for every new contract. It will be implemented to the letter, just like current security requirements. And it will help a bit but things still won't be "secure."
Security is fundamentally picking the level of risk you're willing to accept. The answer is uniformly "none," but strangely enough you still that network hooked up, so you end up with a 4,000 page requirements that effectively amounts to "Well, you need to make sure that _everything_ is 100% locked down and goes through 6 month review and and..."
Security works well when there's no hacks, no rushes and above all no one in the organization who says "I'm important, so these rules represent a threat to my status/are stupid/but this is _important_..." You don't think there's anyone like that in the government, do you?
Program a widget for a smartphone using a already existing framework and pictures that'll display and whatever... Sure, sounds like something "we" should simplify. I'l get on it.
Building said framework? Cool, so you're going to need to know a programming language or two, how those interact with the phone hardware, what the phone hardware's limitations, perhaps some UI design and... hey, where are you going? I've got months more reading for you to do!
Also, problems with the scope and spec (both of which are exquisitely detailed and set in stone prior to work beginning) should also be fixed by the writers of said scope and spec.
You're right, I was going for a joke. What you're showing me is I'm doing a bad job of explaining the benefits of IPv6 and probably need to do more reading.
In my defense, there are probably more "gotchas" to this than you may be giving credit for. Doing "IPv6 to IPv4" translation is, as you say, easy. I don't consider that to be "using" IPv4, though. What I have read has given me some pause - firewall rules need updating, some security concerns need addressing, etc.
I'm not a network guy, just a UNIX sysadmin, so my comments should be taken with a grain of salt the size of my igorance.
Me: "Hello, big boss! I'd like to go to IPv6 soon!"
BB: "What will that take?"
Me: "Oh, probably a couple of months worth of completely dedicated work from your best network folks. If you don't exclusively task them, could take a year."
BB: "Sounds complex. Is it risky?"
Me: "Absolutely! We could totally drop off the internet or lose internal connectivity for quite a while if we mess it up."
BB: "What, exactly, am I getting from this expensive and risky thing?"
Me: "More or less what you have now. The features it does you don't really care about."
BB: "So it's expensive and risky and I get nothing out of it."
* Company data that is not world readable * Low cost (time and money) support. * Users bringing in their own devices that are not editable by the company.
Attempts to have "all three" mean that the cost was underestimated.
Until it breaks. Then the IT guy/gal needs to stay late and help fix the problem. Sometimes (and here's where the IT worker hits the alcohol)... get this... they suggested not to do it in the first place. After a couple times of this happening, IT workers get bitter and angry and don't want anything new on the network.
You'd be amazed what "I'd like to use device X on the network. Here's a couple devices for you, paid for by our department. Would it be possible for you to take a look at them for a couple months and let us know what'd be safe?" will get you.
(Probably not the sort of ignorance you're thinking of, though.)
Start practicing saying "I don't know." You know a lot of technology right now, but in 5 years you'll know less, and in 10 the young kids will roll their eyes when you talk about how it "used to be." Set a big organizational goal ("double our storage space for next year") and then ask the technicians how to make it happen. Resist the urge to do anything more than "suggest" things or vaguely hint at solutions. Know how little you know.
What you shouldn't ever forget is how technology "really works." You know, "fast right cheap pick 2." If your company wants to go with a cheap solution to their problems, make sure you've prepared properly for it.
All the successful technician-to-manager folks I've worked under have suggested solutions, listened when technicians explained problems and tried to get managerial roadblocks out of their way. On the plus side, the best managers I've worked for were promoted techies. Good luck!
"Woah, looks like the app I just installed completely destroyed my paritions. Well, that's what I get for fooling around the day before a big project is due. Guess I'll be up all night typing, probably take me a few days to finish! But that's my own fault. Goodnight, support, see you in the morning!"
"Woah, looks like Bob over there installed some really suspicious software that may be interfering with my ability to work. Guess I'll go over there and spend the rest of the night digging out the crapware on his machine. No need to call support - we wanted it this way."
"Mr. Big Boss, the reason this project isn't done is the file server we run locally crashed last night and we're still recovering it. Of course IT isn't to blame: we run it. It's entirely our fault, no need to call IT."
"No, I don't need admin on my machine, are you nuts? I don't know what I'm doing, I'm not a power user."
In my years in IT, some (not all) of the reasons for crappy IT policies is that everyone wants freedom... until something breaks. Then, regardless of what has been said, it's the IT staff's job to fix it. After a couple of rounds of this (and shrinking budgets), pretty soon the IT staff is shutting down anything not immediately necessary for work.
Throw a couple of technologically illiterate folks on either side of the equation, and you have a corporate IT department.
9/11 worked very well because everyone knew that when your plane is hijacked, you sit down, shut up and do what they say. No use being a hero. After all, they're going to land the plane sometime. Common sense, really.
9/11 won't work again. Sure, bombs might. If over half of the passengers were terrorists who somehow managed to get weapons on board, it might work. But 4-6 guys taking over a plane filled with passengers won't work again.
What worries me is they'll try something else. Probably something that doesn't involve planes. If we're going to waste government money on security, let's waste it thinking about what our enemy will do next.
To start with, I agree with you completely. I do think there's some expectations children have about schools, some expectations that parents have about schools and some expectations that "society" has about schools that are completely wrong. I have a very good friend who is a teacher, and I know it's not the pay and fabulous benefits drawing him in. I've heard his stories about parents' complaints, and they sound like they're from another world.
But... you're not a parent, are you?
At least in the Northern Virginia area (near where I live), a 1 hour -1 1/2 hour commute each way isn't uncommon. And since both parents work (otherwise it'd be a 2 hour commute each way and a crummy house), you've got parents leaving their house around 5-6AM and returning about the same time in the PM. When they return, they've got housecleaning, laundry, food preparation (you are making healthy meals for your family, right? That means "not from scratch."), and anything else they'd like to do that night. (You are getting your 20-30 minutes of exercise daily, right? And you're keeping up with technology and new advances in your field, since you're not doing it during work time. As well as keeping abreast of current events as a good citizen, right?)
Getting tired yet? Keeping in mind "fun time" hasn't showed up in the schedule yet. You might get that on the weekend, assuming you don't have any work projects, house projects, children activities...
I personally work out of my house and since I don't have to commute, my family can afford to live on my salary (in the middle of nowhere.) So given that my wife doesn't work... it's still 9:00 some days before we've finished doing our "parental duties." After a half hour of exercise, it's usually time for bed. (You are getting the doctor recommended 8 hours of sleep, right?)That's with only one small child, too.
I say all of this not because I disagree with what you've said, but because I disagree with the idea that anything as complicated as children's education can be fixed by one of the parties involved. Like other complicated problems, the solution involves all the parties involved moving around and adjusting. I personally think one of the adjustments "society" should make is higher pay for teachers. Teachers can adjust to the idea that there are well meaning parents out there overwhelmed by general life. Parents can take more responsibility for their children and understand schools will not replace them.
Education is important for civic duties, economic ability and general well being. It's a shame it's being treated as an unsolvable political football by our leaders instead of being dealt with seriously.
My 3 year old will spend about 5 happy minutes throwing the Lincoln Logs all over the room, then ask to play with something else. I anticipate him playing with those types of toys in the future, just not right now. If the child is able to play chess, the parent is probably not needing to plop them down in front of the TV.
When I grew up, our family was allowed a half hour of TV a day. Strangely, that half hour was right before dinner. Now I understand my Mom's reasoning...
I've read two books on the history of the NSA and generally follow happenings in the intelligence community... So when I say I'm confused, hopefully it'll be on a higher level. Isn't the NSA prohibited, by its charter, from doing this? And not in a way that's open to interpretation, but in a pretty hard and fast way? IIRC, I recall times the NSA had to dump captured communication traffic because one of the sides was an American in the US. Can someone help me here?
I'd love to walk to my local video store (really), but...
-The closest video store is about 7 miles away. The closest real video store (not just one wall of videos) is more like 15 miles away. - Said video store does not carry old silent movies, current documentaries or eclectic TV shows. Which, interestingly enough, is what I'm interested in.
I'm unhappy that Netflix is doing this, but it does pretty much provide me with a relatively unique service.
I'd have to disagree. _The Sparrow_ seemed to be nothing more than a version of the "problem of evil" (if an all powerful God is good why is there evil?) in new clothes. Certainly Jesuits, if anyone, are mentally equipped to answer that question. The book was certainly well written, but kind of skipped over some of the more fascinating theological ideas (e.g. if there are intelligent aliens, what does that say about the Church? The Bible? God?)
The problem being run into is the complete disregard for continuality displayed in most of the show's run. (This is actually a feature, mostly, unless you start talking about recurring villains.) Yes, when the Daleks first showed up they were mutated beings. Come "Genesis of the Daleks" (one of the show's best stories), the story had been tweaked as mentioned above. Later on, some of the Daleks learned to move outside of their armor again. "Resurrection of the Daleks," while a general muddle overall, had some excellent moments. (Including Dalek-cam and the "special weapons dalek," which apparently got that way through dirt.) Just sit back and enjoy the little guys.
The fundamental problem with tech support is that: 1. The people who call in, by and large, are not computer literate nor very good at troubleshooting. (Troubleshooting in this case being the ability to reduce the problem to "when I do X, Y happens") So they are frustrating to work with. Problems that, were you at their PC, would be solved in seconds take 12 minutes. 2. No one with any level of skill or communication ability wants to work on the phones, because users tend to not be computer literate nor good at troubleshooting. 3. Users with a level of technical ability and skill don't want to call in for support, because they know they'll hit a script reader who won't be able to solve their problem. So they check on the Internet or ask friends to solve their problems. So the only users who call are less experienced users, which brings us back to point 1.
How to break this cycle? I'm not sure. I will point out the computers seems to be a rare instance where an untrained person is expected to be able to perform sometimes complicated operations only by voice instruction. Would you call the manufacturer of your transmission for help "over the phone" in installing it in your car? Of course not - it's understood this is a complicated operation that needs to be performed by a professional in order for things to work correctly. At minimum someone who can actually touch and see the work that needs to be done. I will also point out that the companies who have historically had good support (Cisco, among others) tend to have users that don't fall into category 1.
Slashdot Mirror
I have multiple children, which is the definition of "context switching" and "inability to focus" as well as increased work, so I definitely work less efficiently (and have more work) than when I was single.
I wanted to sleep late. But you know what I did instead? I got up, made breakfast, did laundry, cut the grass, replaced a faucet, pressed and folded said laundry and then cleaned the kitchen. Oh, some days I also try to learn more computing languages on my own time because I can't do that on work time, can I?
I resent the idea that the only thing separating my kids from a deep and abiding interest in all things science is if I only worked a little harder and got my lazy hiney out of bed earlier.
If the Gates foundation arranged for the above to happen every week for me (*cough*), I'd be ecstatic to create cool science experiments for my kids instead. Deal?
I don't know, did she:
1. Deny the validity of the law on its face, but accept the consequences of "breaking the law" until the law itself could be changed?
2. Get upset at the inconvenience of being arrested, tried, all for something that "wasn't breaking the law, so why arrest me in the first place?"
Right, because another requirement/standard will solve this problem. It will get tossed on the pile of requirements for every new contract. It will be implemented to the letter, just like current security requirements. And it will help a bit but things still won't be "secure."
Security is fundamentally picking the level of risk you're willing to accept. The answer is uniformly "none," but strangely enough you still that network hooked up, so you end up with a 4,000 page requirements that effectively amounts to "Well, you need to make sure that _everything_ is 100% locked down and goes through 6 month review and and..."
Security works well when there's no hacks, no rushes and above all no one in the organization who says "I'm important, so these rules represent a threat to my status/are stupid/but this is _important_..." You don't think there's anyone like that in the government, do you?
Program a widget for a smartphone using a already existing framework and pictures that'll display and whatever... Sure, sounds like something "we" should simplify. I'l get on it.
Building said framework? Cool, so you're going to need to know a programming language or two, how those interact with the phone hardware, what the phone hardware's limitations, perhaps some UI design and... hey, where are you going? I've got months more reading for you to do!
Also, problems with the scope and spec (both of which are exquisitely detailed and set in stone prior to work beginning) should also be fixed by the writers of said scope and spec.
That's a good point. At some point, the CEO will say "Make it happen! Now!" and you'd better have a plan.
You're right, I was going for a joke. What you're showing me is I'm doing a bad job of explaining the benefits of IPv6 and probably need to do more reading.
In my defense, there are probably more "gotchas" to this than you may be giving credit for. Doing "IPv6 to IPv4" translation is, as you say, easy. I don't consider that to be "using" IPv4, though. What I have read has given me some pause - firewall rules need updating, some security concerns need addressing, etc.
I'm not a network guy, just a UNIX sysadmin, so my comments should be taken with a grain of salt the size of my igorance.
Like drunk driving. I don't know about where y'all are, but driving drunk is a step above child molestation where I am.
It's just right now, lots of people are doing it, so there's a safety in a herd.
Yes, accept that the same rules (no problems if income is large, if political power is great) that apply to DD apply to "driving-while-texting,"
Me: "Hello, big boss! I'd like to go to IPv6 soon!"
BB: "What will that take?"
Me: "Oh, probably a couple of months worth of completely dedicated work from your best network folks. If you don't exclusively task them, could take a year."
BB: "Sounds complex. Is it risky?"
Me: "Absolutely! We could totally drop off the internet or lose internal connectivity for quite a while if we mess it up."
BB: "What, exactly, am I getting from this expensive and risky thing?"
Me: "More or less what you have now. The features it does you don't really care about."
BB: "So it's expensive and risky and I get nothing out of it."
Me: "Yep! When can I start?"
*doorslam*
Should it? Possibly.
Will it? No. It's amazing how well people play along if the alternative is no paycheck at all.
You can have:
* Company data that is not world readable
* Low cost (time and money) support.
* Users bringing in their own devices that are not editable by the company.
Attempts to have "all three" mean that the cost was underestimated.
Until it breaks. Then the IT guy/gal needs to stay late and help fix the problem. Sometimes (and here's where the IT worker hits the alcohol)... get this... they suggested not to do it in the first place. After a couple times of this happening, IT workers get bitter and angry and don't want anything new on the network.
You'd be amazed what "I'd like to use device X on the network. Here's a couple devices for you, paid for by our department. Would it be possible for you to take a look at them for a couple months and let us know what'd be safe?" will get you.
(Probably not the sort of ignorance you're thinking of, though.)
Start practicing saying "I don't know." You know a lot of technology right now, but in 5 years you'll know less, and in 10 the young kids will roll their eyes when you talk about how it "used to be." Set a big organizational goal ("double our storage space for next year") and then ask the technicians how to make it happen. Resist the urge to do anything more than "suggest" things or vaguely hint at solutions. Know how little you know.
What you shouldn't ever forget is how technology "really works." You know, "fast right cheap pick 2." If your company wants to go with a cheap solution to their problems, make sure you've prepared properly for it.
All the successful technician-to-manager folks I've worked under have suggested solutions, listened when technicians explained problems and tried to get managerial roadblocks out of their way. On the plus side, the best managers I've worked for were promoted techies. Good luck!
Apparently so...
"Woah, looks like the app I just installed completely destroyed my paritions. Well, that's what I get for fooling around the day before a big project is due. Guess I'll be up all night typing, probably take me a few days to finish! But that's my own fault. Goodnight, support, see you in the morning!"
"Woah, looks like Bob over there installed some really suspicious software that may be interfering with my ability to work. Guess I'll go over there and spend the rest of the night digging out the crapware on his machine. No need to call support - we wanted it this way."
"Mr. Big Boss, the reason this project isn't done is the file server we run locally crashed last night and we're still recovering it. Of course IT isn't to blame: we run it. It's entirely our fault, no need to call IT."
"No, I don't need admin on my machine, are you nuts? I don't know what I'm doing, I'm not a power user."
In my years in IT, some (not all) of the reasons for crappy IT policies is that everyone wants freedom... until something breaks. Then, regardless of what has been said, it's the IT staff's job to fix it. After a couple of rounds of this (and shrinking budgets), pretty soon the IT staff is shutting down anything not immediately necessary for work.
Throw a couple of technologically illiterate folks on either side of the equation, and you have a corporate IT department.
9/11 worked very well because everyone knew that when your plane is hijacked, you sit down, shut up and do what they say. No use being a hero. After all, they're going to land the plane sometime. Common sense, really.
9/11 won't work again. Sure, bombs might. If over half of the passengers were terrorists who somehow managed to get weapons on board, it might work. But 4-6 guys taking over a plane filled with passengers won't work again.
What worries me is they'll try something else. Probably something that doesn't involve planes. If we're going to waste government money on security, let's waste it thinking about what our enemy will do next.
To start with, I agree with you completely. I do think there's some expectations children have about schools, some expectations that parents have about schools and some expectations that "society" has about schools that are completely wrong. I have a very good friend who is a teacher, and I know it's not the pay and fabulous benefits drawing him in. I've heard his stories about parents' complaints, and they sound like they're from another world.
But... you're not a parent, are you?
At least in the Northern Virginia area (near where I live), a 1 hour -1 1/2 hour commute each way isn't uncommon. And since both parents work (otherwise it'd be a 2 hour commute each way and a crummy house), you've got parents leaving their house around 5-6AM and returning about the same time in the PM. When they return, they've got housecleaning, laundry, food preparation (you are making healthy meals for your family, right? That means "not from scratch."), and anything else they'd like to do that night. (You are getting your 20-30 minutes of exercise daily, right? And you're keeping up with technology and new advances in your field, since you're not doing it during work time. As well as keeping abreast of current events as a good citizen, right?)
Getting tired yet? Keeping in mind "fun time" hasn't showed up in the schedule yet. You might get that on the weekend, assuming you don't have any work projects, house projects, children activities...
I personally work out of my house and since I don't have to commute, my family can afford to live on my salary (in the middle of nowhere.) So given that my wife doesn't work... it's still 9:00 some days before we've finished doing our "parental duties." After a half hour of exercise, it's usually time for bed. (You are getting the doctor recommended 8 hours of sleep, right?)That's with only one small child, too.
I say all of this not because I disagree with what you've said, but because I disagree with the idea that anything as complicated as children's education can be fixed by one of the parties involved. Like other complicated problems, the solution involves all the parties involved moving around and adjusting. I personally think one of the adjustments "society" should make is higher pay for teachers. Teachers can adjust to the idea that there are well meaning parents out there overwhelmed by general life. Parents can take more responsibility for their children and understand schools will not replace them.
Education is important for civic duties, economic ability and general well being. It's a shame it's being treated as an unsolvable political football by our leaders instead of being dealt with seriously.
My 3 year old will spend about 5 happy minutes throwing the Lincoln Logs all over the room, then ask to play with something else. I anticipate him playing with those types of toys in the future, just not right now. If the child is able to play chess, the parent is probably not needing to plop them down in front of the TV.
When I grew up, our family was allowed a half hour of TV a day. Strangely, that half hour was right before dinner. Now I understand my Mom's reasoning...
I guess that's an answer to my question....
I've read two books on the history of the NSA and generally follow happenings in the intelligence community... So when I say I'm confused, hopefully it'll be on a higher level.
Isn't the NSA prohibited, by its charter, from doing this? And not in a way that's open to interpretation, but in a pretty hard and fast way? IIRC, I recall times the NSA had to dump captured communication traffic because one of the sides was an American in the US.
Can someone help me here?
I'd love to walk to my local video store (really), but...
-The closest video store is about 7 miles away. The closest real video store (not just one wall of videos) is more like 15 miles away.
- Said video store does not carry old silent movies, current documentaries or eclectic TV shows. Which, interestingly enough, is what I'm interested in.
I'm unhappy that Netflix is doing this, but it does pretty much provide me with a relatively unique service.
I'd have to disagree. _The Sparrow_ seemed to be nothing more than a version of the "problem of evil" (if an all powerful God is good why is there evil?) in new clothes. Certainly Jesuits, if anyone, are mentally equipped to answer that question.
The book was certainly well written, but kind of skipped over some of the more fascinating theological ideas (e.g. if there are intelligent aliens, what does that say about the Church? The Bible? God?)
The problem being run into is the complete disregard for continuality displayed in most of the show's run. (This is actually a feature, mostly, unless you start talking about recurring villains.)
Yes, when the Daleks first showed up they were mutated beings. Come "Genesis of the Daleks" (one of the show's best stories), the story had been tweaked as mentioned above. Later on, some of the Daleks learned to move outside of their armor again. "Resurrection of the Daleks," while a general muddle overall, had some excellent moments. (Including Dalek-cam and the "special weapons dalek," which apparently got that way through dirt.)
Just sit back and enjoy the little guys.
The fundamental problem with tech support is that:
1. The people who call in, by and large, are not computer literate nor very good at troubleshooting. (Troubleshooting in this case being the ability to reduce the problem to "when I do X, Y happens") So they are frustrating to work with. Problems that, were you at their PC, would be solved in seconds take 12 minutes.
2. No one with any level of skill or communication ability wants to work on the phones, because users tend to not be computer literate nor good at troubleshooting.
3. Users with a level of technical ability and skill don't want to call in for support, because they know they'll hit a script reader who won't be able to solve their problem. So they check on the Internet or ask friends to solve their problems. So the only users who call are less experienced users, which brings us back to point 1.
How to break this cycle? I'm not sure. I will point out the computers seems to be a rare instance where an untrained person is expected to be able to perform sometimes complicated operations only by voice instruction. Would you call the manufacturer of your transmission for help "over the phone" in installing it in your car? Of course not - it's understood this is a complicated operation that needs to be performed by a professional in order for things to work correctly. At minimum someone who can actually touch and see the work that needs to be done.
I will also point out that the companies who have historically had good support (Cisco, among others) tend to have users that don't fall into category 1.