CFO: "We get to keep a productive employee doing the things he's been doing well, without having to pay for his continuing education and a networking opportunity that may wind up drawing him away from us. I.e., we save money both by not paying exorbitant rates for professional conferences (who charge both the attendees and the exhibitors and thus make money from both ends of the candle), and by not having to go through the hiring process for his replacement. He's also easily replaceable and posting online that he's happy here, so the chances of having to find someone new are low and the cost of doing so is also relatively low. We may even be able to replace him with an H1B and pay less overall. "
This is what's wrong with the tech industry's HR practices - the failure to fully appreciate the value in those "resources" and (very much mistakenly) assuming that they are "easily replaceable". We spend a lot of time and money getting our staff up to speed on all the things they can't learn anywhere but by working here. Some of that is cultural, some of it is technical, all of it is valuable. So spending money on adding to their knowledge is a much better bet that throwing them away and hiring some inexperienced kid with the "skill of the week".
JPEG wasn't standardised until 1992. THere are no 25-year-old JPEG files. Things have changed a lot since 1989.
So what's your point? I have GIF images that predate 1989. The still render just fine. I could convert them if I felt the need. I don't, because the format's are indeed "stable".
I can't think of a single profession which doesn't seem to have a "problem." Makes one wonder.
Makes you wonder what, exactly? That this is not a "problem", because "everybody's doing it?" WTF? Look pal, the "problem" is narrow-minded, clueless misogynist views like that.
Wow! Just wow! I was thinking the same thing myself, except I put "this is a societal problem, not one just in the academic community," after 'Makes one wonder'. Way to go in projecting your fears and negativity on others.
Um, no... Observing that the "problem" is indeed widespread (i.e. a "societal problem") and that this in no way excuses any single community's misogyny is hardly "projecting" anything.
I can't think of a single profession which doesn't seem to have a "problem." Makes one wonder.
Makes you wonder what, exactly? That this is not a "problem", because "everybody's doing it?" WTF? Look pal, the "problem" is narrow-minded, clueless misogynist views like that.
Users who try to use anonymity, or cover themselves up on the internet, are usually doing things that aren’t so-to-speak legal.
They have no evidence of you doing anything illegal, they cannot prove that everyone using Tor is a criminal, but even the hint of suspicion is apparently enough for them to cancel your subscription. I must ask, however, if such behaviour is "so-to-speak legal?"
Legal? Yes. Ethical? Arguable. Should this industry be regulated as a common carrier so such bullshit tactics are ended? Absolutely.
Well given that 5 years ago Al Gore said in 5 years time the Arctic will be completely ice free and it's completely covered in ice still, I would say they have a point. Back to the drawing board with the models at least. If there is one. Which I doubt.
So let me get this straight. Some grandstanding politician makes some dumb-ass statement about climate change and, by your logic, all climate change science is broken. Have I got that right? Or did you have a point that was supported by some kind of actual logic?
Unlocks after an average of about 2.5 swipes. That's fine, for my phone, most of the time, and it would be fine for a weapon, most of the time, which makes it a viable mechanism... none of the time.
As a U.S. company, youse can't engage in bribe and corruption in other countries. Youse have to engage in bribe and corruption in this country first. If youse don', t'ings could happen. You know, t'ings.
While having to wait for text messages on a road is a tad irritating, it might be worth it if it saves some lives. Kind of the very definition of a first world problem...
"Might?" As someone who has been injured and had a vehicle totalled by by some fuckhead who was texting at the wheel (never even hit the brakes before plowing into me) I am here to tell you that we need much harsher penalties for this supremely irresponsible behavior.
It seems to me that the core problem is that companies won't hire actual experienced hackers
Most likely the problem was the exact opposite: They did hire a black hat, and this was an inside job.
No. If history is any indicator, and it usually is, this is just another case of system admin ass-hattery. In other words, bad practices; giving LAN access to the HVAC contractor, allowing remote desktop access by the POS system contractor, etc. All things we've seen before in other high-profile breaches.
Sarcasm is so hard to convey in text. Oh, wait. You were serious? Then you're an idiot. I've lived in metro and suburban areas for the last 20+ years. The vast majority of that time, I had one choice for broadband to my home. One. Yes, I could get DSL instead of Comcast, and I did just that for several years, until the carrier oversold the backhaul so badly the entire neighborhood stopped working. They were quite clear, "Piss off. Upgrades cost more than your business is worth." That, my friend, does not count as a choice.
I would agree that brute-force attacks are hardly news. The door-rattlers have always been there, but the news that over a billion user accounts, that is working credentials that grant access to something, are in the hands of organized criminals, is something else again. The wave of snowshoe spam we've seen over the last few weeks lines up nicely with that news, and our analysis is that compromised user accounts on a widespread assortment of services/hosts appears to be a fundamental part of the campaign. That is news. If we use our imagination a bit, that same trove of credentials could be used for other purposes as well. Owning some accounts with one or more services like namecheap.com would be a a very useful tool. I'm glad that namecheap has been as forthcoming as they have been vigilant.
Actually, it is very difficult to believe atheism would lead to anything, positive or negative. Atheism is the absence of belief...
Captain Pedantic here..., and I am going to stop you right there. Atheism is not the absence of belief. It is the absence of any theistic belief. In a case where "the truth" is pretty much unknowable, that position is itself a belief. While the atheists I know are largely reasonable and intelligent people, an awful lot of them arrogantly refuse to acknowledge that inconvenient fact.
The pope essentially said the same thing recently when he said that young people spend too much time on the Internet.
Religious leaders know that the survival of religion is being threatened by knowledge sharing on the internet, so it shouldn't be any surprise that they would speak out against it.
Not that I feel any need to defend His Holiness, but there's a bit of a difference, don't you think, between calling the Internet "immoral" and observing that young people might have better things to do with some of their time?
Why don't we ask the atheist communists that imprisoned, tortured, and murdered people for going to church?
You mean like the righteous Christians who have done the same thing to tens of thousands for going to the wrong church? Try not to lead with your chin like that. It takes all the sport out of it.
...we needed any more evidence that religious "leaders" are uniquely unqualified to act as an authority on "morality". My command of Sharia is far from what it could be, but I am damn sure that neither Allah nor The Prophet had anything to say about high-speed Internet connections. Most ISP's however, are probably guilty of at least a few "stoning" offenses, but as for the "morality" a faster Internet, the Ayatollah is full of shit. Ignorance is never a moral virtue.
Well, no. I most certainly do not agree with the bill. It is clearly an attempt to hide "the how" behind science facts, placing them on par with (for example) Bible "facts" and then mandating that no one may question either authority (science or the Bible). Fuck that. Scientific "facts" are different because of the method used to bring them to light. Any attempt to remove that method from the comparison is madness.
The entire recording industry's business model was built on artificial scarcity. Until viable digital technologies came along, it was complicated and expensive to mass-produce and distribute recorded music. That model is dying, slowly, but dying just the same. There will not be the mountains of money that the record companies (and to some extent, their artists) enjoyed for many decades. Oh, they're fighting tooth-and-nail to hang onto it, but keeping that model propped up through litigation will ultimately fail. As you say, if the music is that fantastic, people will pay to own it, just not as much as almost everyone things they should.
Slashdot Mirror
CEO: "What happens if we don't, and they stay?"
CFO: "We get to keep a productive employee doing the things he's been doing well, without having to pay for his continuing education and a networking opportunity that may wind up drawing him away from us. I.e., we save money both by not paying exorbitant rates for professional conferences (who charge both the attendees and the exhibitors and thus make money from both ends of the candle), and by not having to go through the hiring process for his replacement. He's also easily replaceable and posting online that he's happy here, so the chances of having to find someone new are low and the cost of doing so is also relatively low. We may even be able to replace him with an H1B and pay less overall. "
This is what's wrong with the tech industry's HR practices - the failure to fully appreciate the value in those "resources" and (very much mistakenly) assuming that they are "easily replaceable". We spend a lot of time and money getting our staff up to speed on all the things they can't learn anywhere but by working here. Some of that is cultural, some of it is technical, all of it is valuable. So spending money on adding to their knowledge is a much better bet that throwing them away and hiring some inexperienced kid with the "skill of the week".
JPEG wasn't standardised until 1992. THere are no 25-year-old JPEG files. Things have changed a lot since 1989.
So what's your point? I have GIF images that predate 1989. The still render just fine. I could convert them if I felt the need. I don't, because the format's are indeed "stable".
I can't think of a single profession which doesn't seem to have a "problem." Makes one wonder.
Makes you wonder what, exactly? That this is not a "problem", because "everybody's doing it?" WTF? Look pal, the "problem" is narrow-minded, clueless misogynist views like that.
Wow! Just wow! I was thinking the same thing myself, except I put "this is a societal problem, not one just in the academic community," after 'Makes one wonder'. Way to go in projecting your fears and negativity on others.
Um, no... Observing that the "problem" is indeed widespread (i.e. a "societal problem") and that this in no way excuses any single community's misogyny is hardly "projecting" anything.
I can't think of a single profession which doesn't seem to have a "problem." Makes one wonder.
Makes you wonder what, exactly? That this is not a "problem", because "everybody's doing it?" WTF? Look pal, the "problem" is narrow-minded, clueless misogynist views like that.
They're not a utility....
Well there's yer problem.
Users who try to use anonymity, or cover themselves up on the internet, are usually doing things that aren’t so-to-speak legal.
They have no evidence of you doing anything illegal, they cannot prove that everyone using Tor is a criminal, but even the hint of suspicion is apparently enough for them to cancel your subscription. I must ask, however, if such behaviour is "so-to-speak legal?"
Legal? Yes. Ethical? Arguable. Should this industry be regulated as a common carrier so such bullshit tactics are ended? Absolutely.
Well given that 5 years ago Al Gore said in 5 years time the Arctic will be completely ice free and it's completely covered in ice still, I would say they have a point. Back to the drawing board with the models at least. If there is one. Which I doubt.
So let me get this straight. Some grandstanding politician makes some dumb-ass statement about climate change and, by your logic, all climate change science is broken. Have I got that right? Or did you have a point that was supported by some kind of actual logic?
Unlocks after an average of about 2.5 swipes. That's fine, for my phone, most of the time, and it would be fine for a weapon, most of the time, which makes it a viable mechanism... none of the time.
Maybe the FCC can finally do their job.
Which would be, what? Doing the bidding of those who grease the most palms? There hasn't been anything stopping them so far.
As a U.S. company, youse can't engage in bribe and corruption in other countries. Youse have to engage in bribe and corruption in this country first. If youse don', t'ings could happen. You know, t'ings.
...the peer review process for publication actually works? You just have to use it? Who knew?
While having to wait for text messages on a road is a tad irritating, it might be worth it if it saves some lives. Kind of the very definition of a first world problem...
"Might?" As someone who has been injured and had a vehicle totalled by by some fuckhead who was texting at the wheel (never even hit the brakes before plowing into me) I am here to tell you that we need much harsher penalties for this supremely irresponsible behavior.
It seems to me that the core problem is that companies won't hire actual experienced hackers
Most likely the problem was the exact opposite: They did hire a black hat, and this was an inside job.
No. If history is any indicator, and it usually is, this is just another case of system admin ass-hattery. In other words, bad practices; giving LAN access to the HVAC contractor, allowing remote desktop access by the POS system contractor, etc. All things we've seen before in other high-profile breaches.
Sarcasm is so hard to convey in text. Oh, wait. You were serious? Then you're an idiot. I've lived in metro and suburban areas for the last 20+ years. The vast majority of that time, I had one choice for broadband to my home. One. Yes, I could get DSL instead of Comcast, and I did just that for several years, until the carrier oversold the backhaul so badly the entire neighborhood stopped working. They were quite clear, "Piss off. Upgrades cost more than your business is worth." That, my friend, does not count as a choice.
I would agree that brute-force attacks are hardly news. The door-rattlers have always been there, but the news that over a billion user accounts, that is working credentials that grant access to something, are in the hands of organized criminals, is something else again. The wave of snowshoe spam we've seen over the last few weeks lines up nicely with that news, and our analysis is that compromised user accounts on a widespread assortment of services/hosts appears to be a fundamental part of the campaign. That is news. If we use our imagination a bit, that same trove of credentials could be used for other purposes as well. Owning some accounts with one or more services like namecheap.com would be a a very useful tool. I'm glad that namecheap has been as forthcoming as they have been vigilant.
Because, yeah, planning for things like nuclear plants is obviously a needless extravagance.
Actually, it is very difficult to believe atheism would lead to anything, positive or negative. Atheism is the absence of belief...
Captain Pedantic here..., and I am going to stop you right there. Atheism is not the absence of belief. It is the absence of any theistic belief. In a case where "the truth" is pretty much unknowable, that position is itself a belief. While the atheists I know are largely reasonable and intelligent people, an awful lot of them arrogantly refuse to acknowledge that inconvenient fact.
The pope essentially said the same thing recently when he said that young people spend too much time on the Internet.
Religious leaders know that the survival of religion is being threatened by knowledge sharing on the internet, so it shouldn't be any surprise that they would speak out against it.
Not that I feel any need to defend His Holiness, but there's a bit of a difference, don't you think, between calling the Internet "immoral" and observing that young people might have better things to do with some of their time?
Why don't we ask the atheist communists that imprisoned, tortured, and murdered people for going to church?
You mean like the righteous Christians who have done the same thing to tens of thousands for going to the wrong church? Try not to lead with your chin like that. It takes all the sport out of it.
...but they went absolutely apeshit when I applied their own logic to Christianity...
Well, there's yer problem, pal. Logic? Seriously? Fear and willful ignorance trumps reason almost every time.
...we needed any more evidence that religious "leaders" are uniquely unqualified to act as an authority on "morality". My command of Sharia is far from what it could be, but I am damn sure that neither Allah nor The Prophet had anything to say about high-speed Internet connections. Most ISP's however, are probably guilty of at least a few "stoning" offenses, but as for the "morality" a faster Internet, the Ayatollah is full of shit. Ignorance is never a moral virtue.
(...and rather reinforcing the gamer=misogynist riff...)
Death Race (Exidy arcade version)
Custer's Revenge (Mystique, for Atari 2600)
Leisure Suit Larry (Sierra)
Well, no. I most certainly do not agree with the bill. It is clearly an attempt to hide "the how" behind science facts, placing them on par with (for example) Bible "facts" and then mandating that no one may question either authority (science or the Bible). Fuck that. Scientific "facts" are different because of the method used to bring them to light. Any attempt to remove that method from the comparison is madness.
I have no faith that the government won't fall for this blatant lie.
I see what you did there... and I agree. When a government has been bought, it should stay bought. Right?
The entire recording industry's business model was built on artificial scarcity. Until viable digital technologies came along, it was complicated and expensive to mass-produce and distribute recorded music. That model is dying, slowly, but dying just the same. There will not be the mountains of money that the record companies (and to some extent, their artists) enjoyed for many decades. Oh, they're fighting tooth-and-nail to hang onto it, but keeping that model propped up through litigation will ultimately fail. As you say, if the music is that fantastic, people will pay to own it, just not as much as almost everyone things they should.