...And when things hit the crapper in another decade, he'd have the means to keep himself and his neighbors safe.)
Yeah. Right. Got anything like, you know, credible information to support this notion, or just the typical foil-hat bloggers? Doesn't matter though, really. Even if your apocalyptic wet dream came true, existing organized gangs (think bikers) will kill the idiots who think a couple of assault rifles and a crate of ammo will protect their stockpiles of food and other hard-to-find stuff. Once that scenario has played out, the smarter marauders will have organized better, trained better, and armed better (not to mention bigger) and will kill the rest of the "survivalists" and take their food. At that point, it might look a lot like "The Postman", only Kevin won't get to fight the copier salesman in single combat, and the whole thing will be a lot darker.
We discussed this a few weeks ago, when the AWS US-east availability zone puked (of it's own accord, no hurricane's required). If you had stuff that lived only there (a single EC2 instance and no ELB, for example), you were screwed. This does not change the fact that "the cloud" (defined as a particular set of services that are readily available from AWS, and probably others) can survive the loss of this or that location just fine. Note that just having the word "cloud" in the name of this or that service does not automatically imbue that service with that level of availability. Read the previous sentence again. And again. Yes, I'm beating the "no magic in the cloud" drum now too, because apparently too many of us don't get it. Yes, you can buy highly available stuff from AWS and others, but a single EC2 instance ain't it.
There is not only a cost of deploying the new tech, but also the cost of change. That cost of change is REALLY high as the current methods are deeply seeded. IPv6 isn't "there" yet... and the experience has been dizzying for many. Now there's another new approach? It may be better, but people don't want the change. Something catastrophic will have to cause such change and...
Yeah, like Y2K. Oh, wait....
I know! Let's get Apple to build it. Apple people will pay obscene sums for shiny new stuff with Apple logos on it.
perhaps you are not understanding what he is saying.
At Home: Files secure. In Cloud: unknown variables. Server down, backup processes, human intervention, government intervention, service turned off without notice
I'll match my cloud provider's availability against my "home" network, any day. As for backups, "the cloud" is, for all practical purposes, a single location. Yes, I know all about distributed storage, availability zones, etc. Don't care. It's not my network/hardware so I have backups that I run and store on my hardware.
At Home: Legally yours, and cannot be searched without a search warrant. In Cloud: Search warrant given to cloud provider, if at all, and data is searched without your knowledge.
If it's sensitive, and you store it on someone else's hardware, unencrypted, you deserve all the unauthorized probing that comes your way. This should be more than obvious.
At Home: Files not datamined unless you download a virus. In Cloud: you can be sure, datamined.
At Home: Files are accessed by known individuals pending hacking In Cloud: People you dont know have access.
Well...,maybe not. If one defines "the cloud" as Facebook, then Woz's warnings are too little, too late. If one defines the cloud as hardware that I don't own but pay to use, AND I've taken steps to make certain my data is safe and secure (encryption, backups, etc.) then his warnings sound like the paranoid worries of someone who doesn't understand the technology, nor it's strengths and weaknesses.
At this point Congress is in a holding pattern until the election. You'd be lucky to get through a resolution expressing condolences to the Colorado shooting victims.
You haven't been paying attention, unless by "at this point" you mean "for the last three years or so". The work of those behind the Tea Party and the polarization (paralysis) that has created within our government is nothing short of masterful.
As someone who can remember when the U.S. infrastructure was the gold-standard, I can say that you don't have a clue. It used to be better. A lot better. So it's not as bad as (insert shit hole country here). Big fucking deal. The fact is that we have, just like India, allowed our roads, power systems, sewers, water supply systems, etc. to fall into disrepair at an alarming rate. The only difference is that we started at a higher level. It's still crumbling and without serious change, is headed for the same place.
Uhm..., no. It should be immediately obvious that the private sector will roll over at the drop of a hat if there's profit (or favorable regulatory "consideration") in it. Christ, man, even contractual obligations like (what we laughingly refer to as) "privacy policies" are on the table when there's cash in play.
You know, I kind of like the idea of deciding for myself what medication I take and when. The idea of my doctor trying to make me ingest a sensor like I'm some sort of medical prisoner is more than a little creepy to me.
You should wish that it was only your doctor keeping tabs on your compliance with his prescribed regimen. The real consumer for this data will be your insurance carrier. "Failure to comply" with prescribed treatment is grounds for termination of benefits.
Perhaps if you are a concert pianist you can tell the difference between a CD recording of a Mozart piano concerto and the same thing on high quality digital tape (or whatever counts as good quality audio). For most of us, they will sound exactly the same
Actually, they won't, if you take the time to listen, on a system capable of faithfully reproducing well-recorded material. And no, it does not take a system that cost eleventeen thousand dollars, complete with solid gold speaker wire, to do this, so let's let go of the "snob" bullshit, m'kay? A usb audio interface (most low-end sound-cards or integrated audio are very noisy) and a decent pair of headphones are all you really need to appreciate the difference. There's nothing wrong with enjoying one's recordings as background to other activities, played through that $200 Wal-Mart stereo, but it's just ignorant to suggest that that experience is as good as it gets for people who don't play the piano.
This. A hundred times this. Now y'all go and look up the definition of the word "fascism" and ask yourself if this is a trend you want to see continue.
Fit the script? I can, without even touching my foil hat, envision a script or two wherein the Koch brothers, along with their pals, profit greatly from global warming. You are quite right, they are not stupid. On the contrary, that crowd has always shown itself to be preternaturally gifted when it comes to making money. They're also utterly devoid of morals and "social conscience", so it's not a stretch to think that they have deliberately delayed any substantial action on global warming while they positioned themselves to profit from that action, or the conditions surrounding it, once it was made. Mistaking that profit motive for "evil intent" is almost as stupid as believing in some benevolent "trickle down economics" fairy tail. The sad part is that those two belief systems add up to an awful lot of stupid, way more than enough for those with the means and and the will to exploit it for profit.
People buy these "safes" because they are cheap and appear to be effective. The average consumer can not be expected to know that they are nowhere near as secure as they are advertised and commonly assumed to be. Given that, there is no free market and a responsible community would see to it that such snake-oil was taken off the market and, better yet, a standard caused to exist against which such products could be evaluated. But no. A dead kid or two is way better than "more gubbamint regulation". Right?
No shit. Life is too short to spend time on that. Then again, life is too short to read yet another entry in the endless and stupid Slashdot "Which OS rulez?" circle-jerk. D'oh!
I have a hard time understanding why people would whine about an outage from a free service. As for "paying customers" -- what were you thinking? You're getting exactly what you paid for a cheap service level. This isn't Old Ma Bell. There is no non-carrier VoIP service has the service level of Ma Bell's wired network..
Then again, neither does the current pile of LEC's (local exchange carriers). POTS or VOIP, they all still suck compared to the Ma Bell days. Then still again, we aren't paying almost a buck a minute for a cross-country phone call anymore either. Yes, young'n's, there was a time when that was the the case.
If you have not formalized both, do it. Right now. You're about 20 years too late, but better late than never. Without those things in place, the organization is much more exposed when the troglodyte dumb-ass opens his mouth around a female employee. If you can say, "Yes, we have a policy against that and all employees are aware of it and have received appropriate education..." you are in a much better legal position. And no, just "having a talk with the guys" is not "appropriate education". Hire a pro.
What about the other 2900 homo sapiens that die daily in traffic accidents around the world? Are they not "people" in your mind?
Not really. But even if they were, their contributions to the statistics would be awkwardly out of context of this discussion, so why would you insist on... Oh, right. You just want to make a point that is not even tangentially related to the discussion at hand.
Quite correct. One hot summer, one stormy winter, even several in a row, does not a climate change make. But a widespread pattern of those, globally, is a very strong indicator that the planet is heating up. Those indicators are the predictable results of more energy in the atmosphere. So..., by itself, this summer's melting of the Greenland ice sheet is not "proof" of anything. Taken along with the many similar statistical "unusual" weather patterns around the planet? Maybe not so much.
You forget that cars' sole purpose is not to kill. Guns' is.
False, or rather, typical, ignorant, gun-fearing, alarmist bullshit. I own several guns. I use them regularly. Some will see thousands of rounds per year go through them. Only one has ever killed anything. Next?
Quite absurd, mostly because you have probably left out big, important details, like whose "net income" you are referring to. Almost certainly, you did not lose your house, your car, or your ability to buy food for you and your family. For most people, a year's worth of "nearly zero" income puts them on the street. If you seriously believe that is any significant number of outliers like yourself, you are badly out of touch with what's happening out there.
When I start to see a significant number of items on the shelves of the Mega-Lo-Mart with "Made In U.S.A." labels, I'll agree. Until then, "increase in domestic manufacturing" is just useless spin.
Let's ignore problem A until we have eliminate problems B-ZZ. That's retarded because the guys opposing drunk driving laws or mental illness bans will say the same thing about guns. Then everyone points a finger at each other and nothing happens anywhere. Let's discuss every matter on its own merit thank you very much.
Yes, let's do just that. Please tell me how banning cars is a realistic solution to the daily carnage in which they are involved. Then tell me who banning guns is a similarly realistic solution for the far smaller problem of gun violence.
[crickets...]
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah. Right. Got anything like, you know, credible information to support this notion, or just the typical foil-hat bloggers? Doesn't matter though, really. Even if your apocalyptic wet dream came true, existing organized gangs (think bikers) will kill the idiots who think a couple of assault rifles and a crate of ammo will protect their stockpiles of food and other hard-to-find stuff. Once that scenario has played out, the smarter marauders will have organized better, trained better, and armed better (not to mention bigger) and will kill the rest of the "survivalists" and take their food. At that point, it might look a lot like "The Postman", only Kevin won't get to fight the copier salesman in single combat, and the whole thing will be a lot darker.
We discussed this a few weeks ago, when the AWS US-east availability zone puked (of it's own accord, no hurricane's required). If you had stuff that lived only there (a single EC2 instance and no ELB, for example), you were screwed. This does not change the fact that "the cloud" (defined as a particular set of services that are readily available from AWS, and probably others) can survive the loss of this or that location just fine. Note that just having the word "cloud" in the name of this or that service does not automatically imbue that service with that level of availability. Read the previous sentence again. And again. Yes, I'm beating the "no magic in the cloud" drum now too, because apparently too many of us don't get it. Yes, you can buy highly available stuff from AWS and others, but a single EC2 instance ain't it.
There is not only a cost of deploying the new tech, but also the cost of change. That cost of change is REALLY high as the current methods are deeply seeded. IPv6 isn't "there" yet... and the experience has been dizzying for many. Now there's another new approach? It may be better, but people don't want the change. Something catastrophic will have to cause such change and...
Yeah, like Y2K. Oh, wait....
I know! Let's get Apple to build it. Apple people will pay obscene sums for shiny new stuff with Apple logos on it.
"not where it's stored."
So we should make the Internet into Plan 9?
Your stupid minds. Stupid! Stupid!
perhaps you are not understanding what he is saying. At Home: Files secure. In Cloud: unknown variables. Server down, backup processes, human intervention, government intervention, service turned off without notice
I'll match my cloud provider's availability against my "home" network, any day. As for backups, "the cloud" is, for all practical purposes, a single location. Yes, I know all about distributed storage, availability zones, etc. Don't care. It's not my network/hardware so I have backups that I run and store on my hardware.
At Home: Legally yours, and cannot be searched without a search warrant. In Cloud: Search warrant given to cloud provider, if at all, and data is searched without your knowledge.
If it's sensitive, and you store it on someone else's hardware, unencrypted, you deserve all the unauthorized probing that comes your way. This should be more than obvious.
At Home: Files not datamined unless you download a virus. In Cloud: you can be sure, datamined. At Home: Files are accessed by known individuals pending hacking In Cloud: People you dont know have access.
Not at all. See above.
Well...,maybe not. If one defines "the cloud" as Facebook, then Woz's warnings are too little, too late. If one defines the cloud as hardware that I don't own but pay to use, AND I've taken steps to make certain my data is safe and secure (encryption, backups, etc.) then his warnings sound like the paranoid worries of someone who doesn't understand the technology, nor it's strengths and weaknesses.
At this point Congress is in a holding pattern until the election. You'd be lucky to get through a resolution expressing condolences to the Colorado shooting victims.
You haven't been paying attention, unless by "at this point" you mean "for the last three years or so". The work of those behind the Tea Party and the polarization (paralysis) that has created within our government is nothing short of masterful.
As someone who can remember when the U.S. infrastructure was the gold-standard, I can say that you don't have a clue. It used to be better. A lot better. So it's not as bad as (insert shit hole country here). Big fucking deal. The fact is that we have, just like India, allowed our roads, power systems, sewers, water supply systems, etc. to fall into disrepair at an alarming rate. The only difference is that we started at a higher level. It's still crumbling and without serious change, is headed for the same place.
Uhm..., no. It should be immediately obvious that the private sector will roll over at the drop of a hat if there's profit (or favorable regulatory "consideration") in it. Christ, man, even contractual obligations like (what we laughingly refer to as) "privacy policies" are on the table when there's cash in play.
You know, I kind of like the idea of deciding for myself what medication I take and when. The idea of my doctor trying to make me ingest a sensor like I'm some sort of medical prisoner is more than a little creepy to me.
You should wish that it was only your doctor keeping tabs on your compliance with his prescribed regimen. The real consumer for this data will be your insurance carrier. "Failure to comply" with prescribed treatment is grounds for termination of benefits.
You know, the one they put you on for not behaving like a good citizen in every thought and deed. WtF?!
Perhaps if you are a concert pianist you can tell the difference between a CD recording of a Mozart piano concerto and the same thing on high quality digital tape (or whatever counts as good quality audio). For most of us, they will sound exactly the same
Actually, they won't, if you take the time to listen, on a system capable of faithfully reproducing well-recorded material. And no, it does not take a system that cost eleventeen thousand dollars, complete with solid gold speaker wire, to do this, so let's let go of the "snob" bullshit, m'kay? A usb audio interface (most low-end sound-cards or integrated audio are very noisy) and a decent pair of headphones are all you really need to appreciate the difference. There's nothing wrong with enjoying one's recordings as background to other activities, played through that $200 Wal-Mart stereo, but it's just ignorant to suggest that that experience is as good as it gets for people who don't play the piano.
This. A hundred times this. Now y'all go and look up the definition of the word "fascism" and ask yourself if this is a trend you want to see continue.
Fit the script? I can, without even touching my foil hat, envision a script or two wherein the Koch brothers, along with their pals, profit greatly from global warming. You are quite right, they are not stupid. On the contrary, that crowd has always shown itself to be preternaturally gifted when it comes to making money. They're also utterly devoid of morals and "social conscience", so it's not a stretch to think that they have deliberately delayed any substantial action on global warming while they positioned themselves to profit from that action, or the conditions surrounding it, once it was made. Mistaking that profit motive for "evil intent" is almost as stupid as believing in some benevolent "trickle down economics" fairy tail. The sad part is that those two belief systems add up to an awful lot of stupid, way more than enough for those with the means and and the will to exploit it for profit.
People buy these "safes" because they are cheap and appear to be effective. The average consumer can not be expected to know that they are nowhere near as secure as they are advertised and commonly assumed to be. Given that, there is no free market and a responsible community would see to it that such snake-oil was taken off the market and, better yet, a standard caused to exist against which such products could be evaluated. But no. A dead kid or two is way better than "more gubbamint regulation". Right?
No shit. Life is too short to spend time on that. Then again, life is too short to read yet another entry in the endless and stupid Slashdot "Which OS rulez?" circle-jerk. D'oh!
USENET was social networking
I have a hard time understanding why people would whine about an outage from a free service. As for "paying customers" -- what were you thinking? You're getting exactly what you paid for a cheap service level. This isn't Old Ma Bell. There is no non-carrier VoIP service has the service level of Ma Bell's wired network. .
Then again, neither does the current pile of LEC's (local exchange carriers). POTS or VOIP, they all still suck compared to the Ma Bell days. Then still again, we aren't paying almost a buck a minute for a cross-country phone call anymore either. Yes, young'n's, there was a time when that was the the case.
If you have not formalized both, do it. Right now. You're about 20 years too late, but better late than never. Without those things in place, the organization is much more exposed when the troglodyte dumb-ass opens his mouth around a female employee. If you can say, "Yes, we have a policy against that and all employees are aware of it and have received appropriate education..." you are in a much better legal position. And no, just "having a talk with the guys" is not "appropriate education". Hire a pro.
90 "people" die in traffic accidents?
What about the other 2900 homo sapiens that die daily in traffic accidents around the world? Are they not "people" in your mind?
Not really. But even if they were, their contributions to the statistics would be awkwardly out of context of this discussion, so why would you insist on... Oh, right. You just want to make a point that is not even tangentially related to the discussion at hand.
Quite correct. One hot summer, one stormy winter, even several in a row, does not a climate change make. But a widespread pattern of those, globally, is a very strong indicator that the planet is heating up. Those indicators are the predictable results of more energy in the atmosphere. So..., by itself, this summer's melting of the Greenland ice sheet is not "proof" of anything. Taken along with the many similar statistical "unusual" weather patterns around the planet? Maybe not so much.
It must suck to live in constant fear like that.
You forget that cars' sole purpose is not to kill. Guns' is.
False, or rather, typical, ignorant, gun-fearing, alarmist bullshit. I own several guns. I use them regularly. Some will see thousands of rounds per year go through them. Only one has ever killed anything. Next?
Quite absurd, mostly because you have probably left out big, important details, like whose "net income" you are referring to. Almost certainly, you did not lose your house, your car, or your ability to buy food for you and your family. For most people, a year's worth of "nearly zero" income puts them on the street. If you seriously believe that is any significant number of outliers like yourself, you are badly out of touch with what's happening out there.
When I start to see a significant number of items on the shelves of the Mega-Lo-Mart with "Made In U.S.A." labels, I'll agree. Until then, "increase in domestic manufacturing" is just useless spin.
Let's ignore problem A until we have eliminate problems B-ZZ. That's retarded because the guys opposing drunk driving laws or mental illness bans will say the same thing about guns. Then everyone points a finger at each other and nothing happens anywhere. Let's discuss every matter on its own merit thank you very much.
Yes, let's do just that. Please tell me how banning cars is a realistic solution to the daily carnage in which they are involved. Then tell me who banning guns is a similarly realistic solution for the far smaller problem of gun violence. [crickets...]