You think that CIO of the largest retailer in the US is a job you can get straight out of DeVry?
Considering how they run the rest of their operations (cut rate, off shore it, squeeze the supplier), can you imagine the firefighting that goes on in their server rooms? "Ah, sir, the array just blew up again. We need to wake up the dba's again."
Meanwhile, off on another planet, CIO: "Do we *really* need an admin on payroll this week?"
And, btw, I'm thinking of the boards of directors of HP and Verizon when I say this. If those nutbars can land on the boards of directors of HP and Verizon, then yes, "... the CIO of the largest retailer in the US is a job you can get straight out of DeVry." Or at least, with every bit as much experience as you get out of DeVry, judging by the cluefulness of the HP & Verizon board members.
Snark, my ass. Twits are raking it in and deserve to be brought down. One of the twits is on both HP and Verizon boards.
You think that CIO of the largest retailer in the US is a job you can get straight out of DeVry?
Considering how they run the rest of their operations (cut rate, off shore it, squeeze the supplier), can you imagine the firefighting that goes on in their server rooms? "Ah, sir, the array just blew up again. We need to wake up the dba's again."
Meanwhile, off on another planet, CIO: "Do we *really* need an admin on payroll this week?"
I don't know about Canada, but in a lot of Countries, people seem to assume (not always correctly) that "you get what you pay for".
Maybe it is different in countries (like China) where piracy is so prevalent, that the pirates actually have competition in the form of other pirates, with the end result being higher quality knock offs.
It's a status/fashion thing. Those buying the $100 T-shirts believe they have a right to expect you paid $100 for your $100 T-shirt.
Americans have rights to use lawfully acquired music for non-commercial purposes...
s/have/had/
and the effort by the RIAA to paint them as pirates is unfortunate.
s/unfortunate/slander/
Mobocracy at its best. Hand your Congress critter a pile of cash and you too can redefine reality. btw, Congress critters can be had for a pittance. You'd be surprised at how little they can be bought for. A grand or two in the *right* hands can make you a millionaire.
[ObDisclaimer: I don't download music. I cherish silence, and despise hypocrites.]
Linus joined my heroes gallery ca. 1993. What the fsck took Time so long?!?
Ah, what the hell. Congrats anyway, Linus, not that you need Time's seal of approval. You've had mine for thirteen years already. I'd kiss your feet if you'd let me.:-)
"It stinks of Microsoft so it must be bad." I don't see how better interop is bad.
Since when has Microsoft desired "better interop"? Since when has Microsoft's plan been to fit in and play nicely with others?
Microsoft's goal has always been to supplant and replace. If they can do that with sales, great. If not, they've never been shy of trying more expedient routes of attack, including theft, libel, and lies. There's nothing new here. It's the same old Microsoft: a "tech" company relying on lawyers instead of innovation and better products.
By some estimates, 80% of net traffic is spam or malware. When do you think extreme measures will be called for? btw, I'm not advocating his extreme measures.
I really see no point in jailing spammers. Sure, I hate spam, but come on, is it worth spending tens of thousands of dollars a year of public money to house and feed a spammer?
Yes. Jail one spammer and it makes the others take notice. Jail ten spammers, and it makes the others fearful. Jail all spammers, and anyone considering spamming will know they'll end up in jail when they spam. The principle is that of deterrence, which is an essential part of the justice system. Cops clean up the mess after the fact. Judges mete out punishment to those determined to have been guilty. Punishment of the guilty encourages deterrence of potential future offenders.
It would be better to impose monetary penalties, or to take measures to ensure the perpetrators won't spam again. Put them under court supervision.
Why? What reason is there for us to go gentle on what is, and has been for about a decade, a scourge of the net? Since before the Greencard Lawyers, it's been steadily escalating to the point that UCE/UBE is now ca. 65% - 80% of network traffic. Russian mafia are hijacking millions of innocent machines for use in botnets, all to leverage more spam onto us. Spammers send, and we pay for its delivery regardless of its worth to us, and we've no say in the matter?!? No. That bird doesn't fly here.
The time for half measures are over, senator.
Jailing a spammer is a waste of money--those tens of thousands of dollars would be better spent on funding technological anti-spam measures.
We've done that. For myself, the spam problem is solved, after years of research and learning how to use the best tools for the job. Still, hundreds of spam land on my ISP account intended for me, only to be immediately sent to/dev/null. Multiply that by the number of customers my ISP has and you begin to see the problem. Multiply that by the number of ISPs there are and you ought to come away reeling. Consider the resources expended the world over by providers just to keep the net at all usable. Many Windows users (poor, pathetic souls) have come to the conclusion that email's no longer usable. That's what spammers have cost us. My ISP is fearful of losing any legitimate email, so they won't drop anything that isn't obviously UCE/UBE, meaning their need for resources just keep going up, meaning my bill keeps going up. This is hardly something that encourages me to think softly of spammers.
As for any of you ambulance chasers out there who're considering taking this on, I have extensive archives going back over years detailing the problem, including the original spam, reports sent to http://spamcop.net/, procmail logs, and fetchmail logs, all providing a "paper trail" of their activities. I would love for you to make me rich off all this. Ask, and ye shall receive.
Advertisers will pay for a billboard without any guarantee from the advertising company about how many people will drive past the sign, how many of those will read it, how many will take the information in and act on it. The client is assumed to be taking a risk in that regard.
Over time people decide for themselves whether a particular type of advertising is working for them. If the business keeps coming in why should there be a need for this type of analysis?
In the past, people have been convinced practices such as trepanning (drilling holes in peoples heads) were good practices. Most now believe this sort of thing pretty much just killed people instead of actually fixing any actual problem. Ditto burning witches and books.
Should we just stand back and wait for the market to catch up, or should we step in and minimize the losses?
Google does produce something valuable if not physical - it produces a ton of people viewing websites who then go onto buy things.
Really? Name one.
I'm serious. Do you know anyone who's bought anything via a click through ad? I don't. Certainly, people do buy stuff via the web, but due to click through ads? Chyaa, right!
These gullible advertisers are steaming along on the same false assumption that spammers are gulled into falling for; that people ("consumers") are stupid enough to be as gullible as they are. They vastly overestimate the gullibility, not to mention their potential to be manipulated from afar, of their target market. Add to that the entire house of cards is based on the same atrocious statistics that sells spam (that some vanishingly small fraction of hits actually pays for the rest of the effort), and you've a lot of gullible dreamers who've no better way to spend marketing dollars and are falling for the party line, since there's nothing else that makes such pie in the sky claims; advertising's the only game in town for the marketing gullible.
I neither watch, nor listen to TV advertising, but I'm aware others do. I'm not sure that's even remotely true about the big bad webternet.
Google, and advertising in general, just haven't yet caught up to the dot com meltdown (they haven't had to, due to the nature of their customers) that the rest of us have long ago put behind us. It's amazing that an entire industry can be so slow on the uptake, but hey, that's marketing. Ignore Reality R Us! That sort of thing is what they do best. It's also about all they do, if you think about it.
I feel your pain. Welcome to the twenty-first century. Give up on expectations of literacy. It's an outmoded, obsolescent, and much resented affectation for today's inhabitants. So goes the continuum.
"The future is a friend of yours and mine."
-- Yes, Big Generator.
It continues to astonish me that there are people out there who have $500 million (half a billion dollars!) to throw at a project as speculative as this. Certainly it's cool and I'd love to have one myself. This guy's able to throw $500 million at something just to see if there's anything there. Woof!
I wish some (one!) of these guys would get it into their heads to toss me $100,000 to see if I might work/do something they might consider cool. I'd spend the rest of my life bouncing from country to country installing Free Software on every box I run across and teaching its owner how to use it. Wouldn't that be a lovely legacy to invest in? Or not sexy enough? Drat. Consider it anyway please, you Mark Shuttleworths of the world.
... we can't trust Microsoft for any reason for anything they do.
So is there some freely available update system that does the same thing as Microsoft's Windows update?
You can't trust Microsoft for any reason for anything they do. Yet you're looking for ways to continue using their software? Are you out of your mind?!?
...why, when something goes wrong in an organization, does the head of organization get called on to resign, when 90% of the time the incident didn't have anything to do with negligence or error on their part?
Boss: "Do we have a backup regime?"
Flunkie: "Sure."
Boss: "Have we tested recovering from them?"
Flunkie: "Uhhh..."
It's their job to ensure everybody under them are doing their jobs.
Show them how to use a dictionary, including derivations. Knowing where a word came from, and what exactly made it up, gives you fine point control. Perhaps delete their spellcheckers to force them to learn to use it.
If you could get only those across, you'd make a world of difference. "aptitude install dict dictd dict-gazetteer dict-gcide dict-jargon dict-moby-thesaurus dict-vera"
Mine would be a Saturday Night Special pointed at my head.
Vista recommends 256 Mb of video RAM. I can't imagine a more ridiculous requirement for an OS attempting to move in on the server market. However, since it would be a server running Windows, you'd probably be spending long hours stuck in front of it trying to drag it back to life, so maybe it does make sense after all, in an insane sort of way.
I abandoned Microsoft because it sucked horribly in numerous ways. FOSS would have to suck a lot for me to even consider going back, and I don't see that happening anytime soon.
How the fsck do I get/. to never, ever, try to tell me about anything, ever, that these two nitwits choose to pontificate on?!?
I don't care. They've nothing of value to say that I care to hear. Even if they manage to say anything of value, I don't (can't begin to) care. Stop trying to tell me what these idiot savants have to say. I don't care!
Now, all we have to do is wait a couple years 'til
you start slobbering your pablum through your
yellowed, match-stick stubs of teeth, and we can
have the same laugh again at your expense.
To quote Bugs Bunny, "What an im-BEC-ile! What an
ultra-maroon!" **What a schmuck!**
Go beat up on a Windoze user. They won't notice it; they're used to abuse.
Slashdot Mirror
And, btw, I'm thinking of the boards of directors of HP and Verizon when I say this. If those nutbars can land on the boards of directors of HP and Verizon, then yes, "... the CIO of the largest retailer in the US is a job you can get straight out of DeVry." Or at least, with every bit as much experience as you get out of DeVry, judging by the cluefulness of the HP & Verizon board members.
Snark, my ass. Twits are raking it in and deserve to be brought down. One of the twits is on both HP and Verizon boards.
Considering how they run the rest of their operations (cut rate, off shore it, squeeze the supplier), can you imagine the firefighting that goes on in their server rooms? "Ah, sir, the array just blew up again. We need to wake up the dba's again."
Meanwhile, off on another planet, CIO: "Do we *really* need an admin on payroll this week?"
Ah. High praise. Says volumes about both of them.
It's a status/fashion thing. Those buying the $100 T-shirts believe they have a right to expect you paid $100 for your $100 T-shirt.
s/have/had/
s/unfortunate/slander/
Mobocracy at its best. Hand your Congress critter a pile of cash and you too can redefine reality. btw, Congress critters can be had for a pittance. You'd be surprised at how little they can be bought for. A grand or two in the *right* hands can make you a millionaire.
[ObDisclaimer: I don't download music. I cherish silence, and despise hypocrites.]
Uh huh. And the RIAA's primary concern is
Linus joined my heroes gallery ca. 1993. What the fsck took Time so long?!?
:-)
Ah, what the hell. Congrats anyway, Linus, not that you need Time's seal of approval. You've had mine for thirteen years already. I'd kiss your feet if you'd let me.
Since when has Microsoft desired "better interop"? Since when has Microsoft's plan been to fit in and play nicely with others?
Microsoft's goal has always been to supplant and replace. If they can do that with sales, great. If not, they've never been shy of trying more expedient routes of attack, including theft, libel, and lies. There's nothing new here. It's the same old Microsoft: a "tech" company relying on lawyers instead of innovation and better products.
By some estimates, 80% of net traffic is spam or malware. When do you think extreme measures will be called for? btw, I'm not advocating his extreme measures.
Skolelinux is up and running in 200 schools the world wide. It's a network (server plus thin client) solution, Webmin for remote, simplified config.
Why? What reason is there for us to go gentle on what is, and has been for about a decade, a scourge of the net? Since before the Greencard Lawyers, it's been steadily escalating to the point that UCE/UBE is now ca. 65% - 80% of network traffic. Russian mafia are hijacking millions of innocent machines for use in botnets, all to leverage more spam onto us. Spammers send, and we pay for its delivery regardless of its worth to us, and we've no say in the matter?!? No. That bird doesn't fly here. The time for half measures are over, senator.
We've done that. For myself, the spam problem is solved, after years of research and learning how to use the best tools for the job. Still, hundreds of spam land on my ISP account intended for me, only to be immediately sent to
Bookmarked, thanks.
As for any of you ambulance chasers out there who're considering taking this on, I have extensive archives going back over years detailing the problem, including the original spam, reports sent to http://spamcop.net/, procmail logs, and fetchmail logs, all providing a "paper trail" of their activities. I would love for you to make me rich off all this. Ask, and ye shall receive.
In the past, people have been convinced practices such as trepanning (drilling holes in peoples heads) were good practices. Most now believe this sort of thing pretty much just killed people instead of actually fixing any actual problem. Ditto burning witches and books.
Should we just stand back and wait for the market to catch up, or should we step in and minimize the losses?
Really? Name one.
I'm serious. Do you know anyone who's bought anything via a click through ad? I don't. Certainly, people do buy stuff via the web, but due to click through ads? Chyaa, right!
These gullible advertisers are steaming along on the same false assumption that spammers are gulled into falling for; that people ("consumers") are stupid enough to be as gullible as they are. They vastly overestimate the gullibility, not to mention their potential to be manipulated from afar, of their target market. Add to that the entire house of cards is based on the same atrocious statistics that sells spam (that some vanishingly small fraction of hits actually pays for the rest of the effort), and you've a lot of gullible dreamers who've no better way to spend marketing dollars and are falling for the party line, since there's nothing else that makes such pie in the sky claims; advertising's the only game in town for the marketing gullible.
I neither watch, nor listen to TV advertising, but I'm aware others do. I'm not sure that's even remotely true about the big bad webternet.
Google, and advertising in general, just haven't yet caught up to the dot com meltdown (they haven't had to, due to the nature of their customers) that the rest of us have long ago put behind us. It's amazing that an entire industry can be so slow on the uptake, but hey, that's marketing. Ignore Reality R Us! That sort of thing is what they do best. It's also about all they do, if you think about it.
From the /. Main Page listing this item: "12 of 9 comments". What?
I feel your pain. Welcome to the twenty-first century. Give up on expectations of literacy. It's an outmoded, obsolescent, and much resented affectation for today's inhabitants. So goes the continuum.
"The future is a friend of yours and mine."
-- Yes, Big Generator.
It continues to astonish me that there are people out there who have $500 million (half a billion dollars!) to throw at a project as speculative as this. Certainly it's cool and I'd love to have one myself. This guy's able to throw $500 million at something just to see if there's anything there. Woof!
I wish some (one!) of these guys would get it into their heads to toss me $100,000 to see if I might work/do something they might consider cool. I'd spend the rest of my life bouncing from country to country installing Free Software on every box I run across and teaching its owner how to use it. Wouldn't that be a lovely legacy to invest in? Or not sexy enough? Drat. Consider it anyway please, you Mark Shuttleworths of the world.
Flunkie: "Sure."
Boss: "Have we tested recovering from them?"
Flunkie: "Uhhh
It's their job to ensure everybody under them are doing their jobs.
"I hear they have some great "Excel Expert Masters" in the department of redundancy department."
Ditto in the oxymoron dept.
If you could get only those across, you'd make a world of difference. "aptitude install dict dictd dict-gazetteer dict-gcide dict-jargon dict-moby-thesaurus dict-vera"
Mine would be a Saturday Night Special pointed at my head.
Vista recommends 256 Mb of video RAM. I can't imagine a more ridiculous requirement for an OS attempting to move in on the server market. However, since it would be a server running Windows, you'd probably be spending long hours stuck in front of it trying to drag it back to life, so maybe it does make sense after all, in an insane sort of way.
I abandoned Microsoft because it sucked horribly in numerous ways. FOSS would have to suck a lot for me to even consider going back, and I don't see that happening anytime soon.
How the fsck do I get /. to never, ever, try to tell me about anything, ever, that these two nitwits choose to pontificate on?!?
I don't care. They've nothing of value to say that I care to hear. Even if they manage to say anything of value, I don't (can't begin to) care. Stop trying to tell me what these idiot savants have to say. I don't care!
Am I beginning to make myself clear?
Now, all we have to do is wait a couple years 'til
you start slobbering your pablum through your
yellowed, match-stick stubs of teeth, and we can
have the same laugh again at your expense.
To quote Bugs Bunny, "What an im-BEC-ile! What an
ultra-maroon!" **What a schmuck!**
Go beat up on a Windoze user. They won't notice it; they're used to abuse.