You dismiss the article because of the source, yet offer no counter to their position or opinion.
Well, to be fair, you're offering very little in return as well. What is your answer to Schneier's, "I have one message to the executives of those companies: fight." Is that even possible? Secret orders received from secretive agencies backed up by secret courts; what's an executive able to do to fight this, other than close up shop or shift the op to another jurisdiction?
I usually agree with Schneier (though I've not RTFA'd) and I do wonder what's a real patriot do when one day they wake up and find they're living in a fascist state and don't appreciate it.
I think the USA's done. Over. Kaput. Your politicians aren't even bothering to try to come up with plausible explanations for the !@#$ that's going on in your name. We're just waiting for it to fall in on itself and see what rises from the ashes.
In this scenario, it's only insider trading if he knew the stock would go down, not expect them to go, up after he sold.
If you already know that you've told the NSA to take a hike - and you know (or have a good idea) that this will have implications for the government projects you're bidding for...
Why would he know those signed contracts were dependent upon them selling out their customers, contrary to the wording of the Constitution? Oh yeah, because the Constitution ought to be considered as worthless as toilet paper in this day and age, silly. What rock have you been hiding under?!?
Although current theories of Dark Matter are pretty vague and ether-like at this point, weakly interacting particles have been demonstrated in the past, like neutrinos. It's far from being implausible or wild guessing.
I'm not saying that. It just seemed like extrapolating to new exotic particles wasn't called for if mere misunderstood dust might explain the phenomenon. I've since been informed that they indeed have thought of this and (rightly or wrongly) discarded it for various reasons.
[The/. bottom page quote: "You can not get anything worthwhile done without raising a sweat. -- The First Law Of Thermodynamics]
You're a fool if you think that regular astronomers are 'finally twigging' out about events that don't directly radiate in the visible spectrum.
I may indeed be a fool. I've also run across many a science program on teevee hosting a distinguished representer who gushes over this subject. "We can't see *a lot of stuff!* Who knew?!?" Go figure.
The problem with dark matter observation in this case is that science is based on empirical observation. If you can't see it, can't measure it, and can't even draw inferences from what you can see and measure...
But we do find it empirically. There is extra mass there, affecting other objects. We can detect it through it's gravitation, just not through light.
Am I the only one astonished to learn that regular astronomers are finally twigging to the fact that a lot of stuff out there can't be seen or detected by what we've got to work with? Why hasn't it been in your face obvious to everyone that there's a lot of stuff that doesn't radiate in the visible spectrum, or strong enough in an altogether different part of the spectrum for us to have seen or been able to describe before now. Of course we're going to finally wonder why that galaxy is spinning oddly based on the well known facts of such things such as the laws of motion.
Why invent exotic matter when the right combination of dust could be the answer?
Irrespective of all the "installing a plugin to determine secuity status" comments I've read so far ,...
I'd just like to say that a strip window in the bottom of my browser that spits a running commentary (a la XConsole)of what the browser's doing in the background and who it's talking to, would be cool. I want what it spits out to be user selectable and configurable. Get on it. You know you want to.
No attempt at sounding smart after writing that is going to work.
"Could've" ("could have") as "could of" just means they've picked it up from hearing it, not reading it. You should applaud their jumping back into the wrealm of the written word.
Well, I was going to pat Timothy on the back for a couple of great intros (this and the dark matter controversy), but now that you've gone and said it all...
Michelson and Morley found nothing, they were full of shit.
Yeah, experimenting to prove something beyond a shadow of a doubt is always just a waste of time and effort. I hear Kepler was disappointed to learn of elliptical orbits too.
Uh, no. Use Linux (or *BSD) and point your local SMTP at your ISP's Smarthost. Encrypt files locally with GnuPG and send them as attachments. The only difficult part is expecting the recipients to do the same in reverse and to treat your privacy as seriously as you do. There, you'll need to exercise judgment as to who to trust and with what (just like in every other area of life).
I really couldn't give a rat's ass how many cycles the NSA wastes on trying to crack my encrypted attachments. I consider myself fortunate in not having to support them financially (I'm non-US). I've toyed with the idea of making a cronjob blast out emails to random addresses simply to supply them with stuff to waste time and effort on, but I don't really care that much to bother.
If I ever manage to contact the Medellin or Cali or Zeta cartels' IT guys, I'll have a proposal for them, but so far no joy there. That would be great fun.
No, I didn't. When your nuclear physicist or rocket scientist takes a day off, do you expect your receptionist to dig into their notes to fill in? I produce good documentation and well commented code that those with an average knowledge or skill in the area can use to enlighten themselves to carry on my work. I don't expect managers to understand it nor do I expect them to want to. Writing it so they could would bore to death those who actually could fill in.
Having worked for a smaller company that could only afford a one person IT department, I agree that it doesn't make sense paying for a second full time person to sit around and stare at the primary sysadmin while they do their job.
I've worked for a few of those too, yet I've never seen that. There's always been a lineup of requested features, systems due to be replaced/enhanced/re-worked, unexpected fires to be fought, and things to be learned or re-learned. Sitting around staring at someone else who's doing the work is what managers and ditch diggers do, not IT people, and I wish those people confined themselves to Facebook instead of trying to muddy the waters on tech sites. Why aren't they ruining HR's day instead of mine? HR's not doing anything useful.
No organization has the budget to pay for full time "understudies" for every role in the company.
Nor did I suggest that. Some roles certainly do deserve to be thought of in this way. If your IT infrastructure is as important to your business as we around here think it generally is, companies ought to be putting a lot more thought into this. IT is not just an accounting cost centre when it's storing critical business records, serving as the business' marketing face on the Internet, and making day to day work for thousands of employees even possible.
What you're, in fact, saying is that you feel you have no particular professional responsibility to document your work...
No, I'm not saying that. I take documentation duties seriously; as seriously as I wish companies would take their obligations. Modern companies don't think they should have to, and that makes them shallow and brittle and makes my job vastly more difficult. You can't cheap out on critical infrastructure and expect to get away with it for too long.
Some companies can't afford 2 sysadmin people. It's not that they are deliberately gambling, they are doing the best they can with limited money.
I don't agree. If admin is critical to the future of the business, either they're cheaping out or they shouldn't be in the business in the first place as they're incapable of estimating the real cost of doing that business.
If something fails when I'm home sick and the business suffers, they should be wearing a "Kick me!" sign on their back. They've no right to blame anyone but themselves. I'm human, not a perfect machine or a robot. Expecting otherwise is just wishful thinking on their part. They deserve the consequences.
Then document as if you might be killed in a car accident on the way home to work and your manager has to take over.
I've never understood why any admin would care about this. If the employer is too cheap to realise they need support in depth to actually be supported, why should I care about the operation going tits up if I get taken out by a bus? They gambled knowing the risks and lost. Suck it up.
Real support is more than one over-worked wizard who knows and controls everything (cf. San Francisco). I want to be training a PNG into the position who can learn, who I can bounce ideas off, who comes in with a different perspective and history from mine, helps with the drudge work, and takes over when I'm not there (sick, recovering from an outage, holidays, bus error).
Any employer who can't see this can go fsck themselves. You get what you pay for. You gamble wrong, you ought to lose your shirt.
What if the dentist's qualifications were not proper and complete?
In the Twenty-First Century, dentists are still drilling holes in peoples' heads. The world would be a better place if every last one of them committed suicide if that's the best they can come up with.
Neither good brain nor good body are likely to provide you with a good relationship.
I disagree, and I predict that without either you are much more likely to have a lousy relationship. Besides, since when did sex have anything to do with the relationship?
You Slashbitches just can't accept that some guys like females.
No, no, some of us do like females, some even as sexual partners.
On the other hand, I don't much appreciate having to negotiate my way around the dreck that morons such you tend to spew. Welcome to oblivion. Wear it proudly. You earned it.
Perhaps, I don't know, a constitutional republic that exists to provide for the common defense, the peaceful mediation of disputes, and holds only limited and specifically enumerated powers derived from the consent of the governed such that it may not infringe upon the unalienable rights of the people?
It's been tried, and even that reasonable form of it failed miserably. If you concentrate any power at all in a gov't, no matter how many checks and balances you put in place to keep it honest, the criminal class will gravitate towards it and twist it to their advantage. It always happens. Not only that but even if you explicitly insist that the citizenry have a right and a duty to revolt against tyranny, most people won't want to believe the situation's deteriorated enough to need to. They just want to be left alone to live their lives in relative peace.
Sucks, but what can you do? You can try to keep gov't small enough to be effective and accountable but when a big enough bully rears his head, they'll need to band together to defeat him. Presto, big gov't.
mandela said that nonviolent protest was ineffective against armed enforcement, while mlk (& ghandi) said that nonviolence was the only way to overthrow the oppressors. who was right?
Since we're analyzing, both MLK and Ghandi were assassinated. Does that tell us anything about the conundrum, other than Mandela outlived the others? Perhaps Mandela's many years in prison protected him from assassins, or maybe life's just a damned crap shoot.
Slashdot Mirror
You dismiss the article because of the source, yet offer no counter to their position or opinion.
Well, to be fair, you're offering very little in return as well. What is your answer to Schneier's, "I have one message to the executives of those companies: fight." Is that even possible? Secret orders received from secretive agencies backed up by secret courts; what's an executive able to do to fight this, other than close up shop or shift the op to another jurisdiction?
I usually agree with Schneier (though I've not RTFA'd) and I do wonder what's a real patriot do when one day they wake up and find they're living in a fascist state and don't appreciate it.
I think the USA's done. Over. Kaput. Your politicians aren't even bothering to try to come up with plausible explanations for the !@#$ that's going on in your name. We're just waiting for it to fall in on itself and see what rises from the ashes.
In this scenario, it's only insider trading if he knew the stock would go down, not expect them to go, up after he sold.
If you already know that you've told the NSA to take a hike - and you know (or have a good idea) that this will have implications for the government projects you're bidding for ...
Why would he know those signed contracts were dependent upon them selling out their customers, contrary to the wording of the Constitution? Oh yeah, because the Constitution ought to be considered as worthless as toilet paper in this day and age, silly. What rock have you been hiding under?!?
Ah, good to know, my bad.
Although current theories of Dark Matter are pretty vague and ether-like at this point, weakly interacting particles have been demonstrated in the past, like neutrinos. It's far from being implausible or wild guessing.
I'm not saying that. It just seemed like extrapolating to new exotic particles wasn't called for if mere misunderstood dust might explain the phenomenon. I've since been informed that they indeed have thought of this and (rightly or wrongly) discarded it for various reasons.
[The /. bottom page quote: "You can not get anything worthwhile done without raising a sweat. -- The First Law Of Thermodynamics]
You're a fool if you think that regular astronomers are 'finally twigging' out about events that don't directly radiate in the visible spectrum.
I may indeed be a fool. I've also run across many a science program on teevee hosting a distinguished representer who gushes over this subject. "We can't see *a lot of stuff!* Who knew?!?" Go figure.
The problem with dark matter observation in this case is that science is based on empirical observation. If you can't see it, can't measure it, and can't even draw inferences from what you can see and measure ...
But we do find it empirically. There is extra mass there, affecting other objects. We can detect it through it's gravitation, just not through light.
Am I the only one astonished to learn that regular astronomers are finally twigging to the fact that a lot of stuff out there can't be seen or detected by what we've got to work with? Why hasn't it been in your face obvious to everyone that there's a lot of stuff that doesn't radiate in the visible spectrum, or strong enough in an altogether different part of the spectrum for us to have seen or been able to describe before now. Of course we're going to finally wonder why that galaxy is spinning oddly based on the well known facts of such things such as the laws of motion.
Why invent exotic matter when the right combination of dust could be the answer?
Irrespective of all the "installing a plugin to determine secuity status" comments I've read so far , ...
I'd just like to say that a strip window in the bottom of my browser that spits a running commentary (a la XConsole)of what the browser's doing in the background and who it's talking to, would be cool. I want what it spits out to be user selectable and configurable. Get on it. You know you want to.
>could of
No attempt at sounding smart after writing that is going to work.
"Could've" ("could have") as "could of" just means they've picked it up from hearing it, not reading it. You should applaud their jumping back into the wrealm of the written word.
...that if someone burned down the building with all these hackers inside ...
It'd be easier to determine your whereabouts.
that's all.
Well, I was going to pat Timothy on the back for a couple of great intros (this and the dark matter controversy), but now that you've gone and said it all ...
Uh, thanks Timothy.
Michelson and Morley found nothing, they were full of shit.
Yeah, experimenting to prove something beyond a shadow of a doubt is always just a waste of time and effort. I hear Kepler was disappointed to learn of elliptical orbits too.
You would have to lease space in a datacenter ...
Uh, no. Use Linux (or *BSD) and point your local SMTP at your ISP's Smarthost. Encrypt files locally with GnuPG and send them as attachments. The only difficult part is expecting the recipients to do the same in reverse and to treat your privacy as seriously as you do. There, you'll need to exercise judgment as to who to trust and with what (just like in every other area of life).
I really couldn't give a rat's ass how many cycles the NSA wastes on trying to crack my encrypted attachments. I consider myself fortunate in not having to support them financially (I'm non-US). I've toyed with the idea of making a cronjob blast out emails to random addresses simply to supply them with stuff to waste time and effort on, but I don't really care that much to bother.
If I ever manage to contact the Medellin or Cali or Zeta cartels' IT guys, I'll have a proposal for them, but so far no joy there. That would be great fun.
Why do I always see these posts where it seems like someone is having a completely different conversation from another universe?
Outside of your Mom's basement is not another Universe.
No, I'm not saying that.
You did say that ...
No, I didn't. When your nuclear physicist or rocket scientist takes a day off, do you expect your receptionist to dig into their notes to fill in? I produce good documentation and well commented code that those with an average knowledge or skill in the area can use to enlighten themselves to carry on my work. I don't expect managers to understand it nor do I expect them to want to. Writing it so they could would bore to death those who actually could fill in.
Having worked for a smaller company that could only afford a one person IT department, I agree that it doesn't make sense paying for a second full time person to sit around and stare at the primary sysadmin while they do their job.
I've worked for a few of those too, yet I've never seen that. There's always been a lineup of requested features, systems due to be replaced/enhanced/re-worked, unexpected fires to be fought, and things to be learned or re-learned. Sitting around staring at someone else who's doing the work is what managers and ditch diggers do, not IT people, and I wish those people confined themselves to Facebook instead of trying to muddy the waters on tech sites. Why aren't they ruining HR's day instead of mine? HR's not doing anything useful.
No organization has the budget to pay for full time "understudies" for every role in the company.
Nor did I suggest that. Some roles certainly do deserve to be thought of in this way. If your IT infrastructure is as important to your business as we around here think it generally is, companies ought to be putting a lot more thought into this. IT is not just an accounting cost centre when it's storing critical business records, serving as the business' marketing face on the Internet, and making day to day work for thousands of employees even possible.
What you're, in fact, saying is that you feel you have no particular professional responsibility to document your work ...
No, I'm not saying that. I take documentation duties seriously; as seriously as I wish companies would take their obligations. Modern companies don't think they should have to, and that makes them shallow and brittle and makes my job vastly more difficult. You can't cheap out on critical infrastructure and expect to get away with it for too long.
Some companies can't afford 2 sysadmin people. It's not that they are deliberately gambling, they are doing the best they can with limited money.
I don't agree. If admin is critical to the future of the business, either they're cheaping out or they shouldn't be in the business in the first place as they're incapable of estimating the real cost of doing that business.
If something fails when I'm home sick and the business suffers, they should be wearing a "Kick me!" sign on their back. They've no right to blame anyone but themselves. I'm human, not a perfect machine or a robot. Expecting otherwise is just wishful thinking on their part. They deserve the consequences.
Then document as if you might be killed in a car accident on the way home to work and your manager has to take over.
I've never understood why any admin would care about this. If the employer is too cheap to realise they need support in depth to actually be supported, why should I care about the operation going tits up if I get taken out by a bus? They gambled knowing the risks and lost. Suck it up.
Real support is more than one over-worked wizard who knows and controls everything (cf. San Francisco). I want to be training a PNG into the position who can learn, who I can bounce ideas off, who comes in with a different perspective and history from mine, helps with the drudge work, and takes over when I'm not there (sick, recovering from an outage, holidays, bus error).
Any employer who can't see this can go fsck themselves. You get what you pay for. You gamble wrong, you ought to lose your shirt.
lucky you kan reed, I spose :).
Well, that certainly shores up your credibility here. I'd like a double-burger with fries and a strawberry shake, please.
What if the dentist's qualifications were not proper and complete?
In the Twenty-First Century, dentists are still drilling holes in peoples' heads. The world would be a better place if every last one of them committed suicide if that's the best they can come up with.
Neither good brain nor good body are likely to provide you with a good relationship.
I disagree, and I predict that without either you are much more likely to have a lousy relationship. Besides, since when did sex have anything to do with the relationship?
You Slashbitches just can't accept that some guys like females.
No, no, some of us do like females, some even as sexual partners.
On the other hand, I don't much appreciate having to negotiate my way around the dreck that morons such you tend to spew. Welcome to oblivion. Wear it proudly. You earned it.
Perhaps, I don't know, a constitutional republic that exists to provide for the common defense, the peaceful mediation of disputes, and holds only limited and specifically enumerated powers derived from the consent of the governed such that it may not infringe upon the unalienable rights of the people?
It's been tried, and even that reasonable form of it failed miserably. If you concentrate any power at all in a gov't, no matter how many checks and balances you put in place to keep it honest, the criminal class will gravitate towards it and twist it to their advantage. It always happens. Not only that but even if you explicitly insist that the citizenry have a right and a duty to revolt against tyranny, most people won't want to believe the situation's deteriorated enough to need to. They just want to be left alone to live their lives in relative peace.
Sucks, but what can you do? You can try to keep gov't small enough to be effective and accountable but when a big enough bully rears his head, they'll need to band together to defeat him. Presto, big gov't.
Are you asking for permission, or trying to hire assassins?
mandela said that nonviolent protest was ineffective against armed enforcement, while mlk (& ghandi) said that nonviolence was the only way to overthrow the oppressors. who was right?
Since we're analyzing, both MLK and Ghandi were assassinated. Does that tell us anything about the conundrum, other than Mandela outlived the others? Perhaps Mandela's many years in prison protected him from assassins, or maybe life's just a damned crap shoot.
Sybase just got bought by SAP and increased their price by 600%
SAP must really hate Sybase. Is there a Mafia vendetta in play here?