see, there's this problem: you're a successful musician, and the record company appears to be ripping you off. they probably are. but a large part of the apparent rip off is because they are also making lossy investments in new artists which never work out.
How is a record company any different from, say, a Venture Capatalist? Well, that's easy: A VC is willing to eat a loss, but a record company isn't... Part of this is based on business models. A VC is looking for a group that will be successful for a *long time*, one that can make a billion a year, every year. A record company, on the other hand, is looking for a flash in the pan. Somone who can make them a quick couple of hundred million before burning out. A VC can afford to lose on 9 out of 10 investements becuase that one that is successful will be around for a while and continue to bring in more money. This is not the case for record companies, becuase, with some exceptions, of course, even thier most successful artists aren't usually *continuously* profitable.
By openining McAfee up to the "FBI Virus", they are obviously opening it up to any "similar, but malicious" viruses. The only way to guarantee that it will work, it will have to be able to compare the virus byte-for-byte with the FBI virus. For it to do that, it must quite literally have a copy of this virus buried internally in the virus definition file. Since you have a copy of the virus coming packaged with McAfee, why doesn't McAfee just INSTALL THE VIRUS when requested to do so by the FBI. That would solve the probelm of allowing other "cracker" versions of the virus on to the system, since they will be installed locally by McAfee itself... Of course, this makes no sense for an anti-virus company to be intentionally installing viruses, but whatever.
It is only a matter of time until this spreads to higher government, at which time we will filter out all important but secular information out of the internet. All scientific books will be banned because they can enable a person to question god, create explosives, toxic gases, or drugs. That is of course if current trends continue.;(
But then, after we have banned all the "dangerous" books (Harry Potter included), melted all the guns, GPS tagged all the citizens, filtered all the email, had the bible be the only officially allowed carry-on, and surrounded ourselves with missle defence shields, FINALLY we will be 100% safe from ALL the Bad Things...
A) By making each piece of sensitive information harder to get to, you make it exponentially more time consuming to query FROM vast realms of it. e.g., if the terrorists wanted to know the exact engineering specifications used for all the nuclear plants around the country to look for a particularly weak design.
B) By making information harder to come by, we can up the ante by forcing the terrorists as a GROUP, to become more sophisticated/educated. e.g., the size of the effort rules out the few top level people, but the scope/difficult rules out the average ignorant terrorist.
C) By making information harder to come by, we can make the act of looking for that information much riskier. For instance, rather than merely having to go online or to any public library (anonymously), they must go to a few enumerated locations and risk being spotted and/or creating a trail after the fact.
So, by this logic, the only terrorists left will be those who are patient, intelligent, and willing to take incredible risks. By circumventing the flow of information you won't make the terrorists go away, you know. Instead you'll make them smarter, more educated, make them plan more carefully, and make them REALLY commit to a task mentally and spiritually, becuase they will know the risks are great.
How does this argument end up being for the destruction of public records?
I know this will sound silly, but it works for some reason. If you are sending a resume to one of those "resumes@foo.com" or "jobs@bar.com", most likely you will see it filed away and never see a human response. A trick I learned (by accident) is to send an email to one of these addresses talking about your "attached" resume ("As you can see by my skills x and y in my resume blah blah..."), but *don't* actually attach it. 90% of the time you will get an email back from a *person* (i.e. not an autoresponder) asking if you could try and send it again. Now you have an actual email address of somone in H.R. that you can use to send polite emails concering the status of your application, etc.
I know many people will scoff at this idea saying "No self respecting tech company will hire you if you show you're too stupid to be able to attach a resume!" But this isn;t the case. Most of the people who work in HR are the types who find it perfectly resonable to make a mistake and forget to press the "attach" button, or else they are the types that believe whole-heartedly that attachements can get "lost in the mail" even if it's email.
Once you have an actual person (sometimes including a phone number!) you have the chance to add a little "human touch". As long as you are polite and don't make yourself look bad, this extra little boost can be what seperates you from the rest of teh stack of resumes.
I saw a giant green blob today too, here in San Francisco. It was from 8:15 to about 10:00. Reportedly it was caused by Pixar... Oh, and there was a strange Star Wars teaser before the blob started...
This is the remedy for all companies in the IT industry - not just Microsoft.
Wow, this is so right! Very few people understand that closing protocals does nothing but hurt everyone, INCLUDING your partners and yourself. The last company I worked for was a Microsoft "Partner" developing some business web-service things. Well, we had been developing for over two years and could simply not turn out a product. What was our problem? Over 90% of the work we were doing was fscking around with SOAP interop problems between the jillion ever-so-slightly-different implementations of SOAP and WSDL. Actual business logic took, perhaps, 2-4 months of coding work, the rest of that time was completely and totally focused on getting the "plumbing" to work. If standards were really solidified and not moving targets, we could have been out on the market a year ago...
Yes you can still destory the pictures and/or negatives, but that is done later, not live at the scene.
I've seen enough episones of the "Brady Bunch" to know that opening the back of your camera by accident (or by dropping it) is a very easy way to erase all your pictures "live at the scene".
All the photographers shooting with digital thought: "ah, a nothing shot" and deleted it. When the story broke and the shit hit the fan, who was the one still photographer who had a shot of this? The one shooting on film.
This is the fault of the photographers and not the medium. I could take a picture of a sports game with a regular camera and think to myself "aw it's a nothing shot" and set it and it's negative on fire in an ashtray. Despite the fact that in the upper left corner was the conclusive proof of the existance of UFO's and a face shot of the "real killers" to the JFK assassinations and the Nicole Brown stabbings both shaking hands with Bin Ladin, I still will have destroyed the pictures.
Just because some photographers are either too poor to buy a zip-disk and a few extra batteries or else too lazy or stupid to archive thier images doesn't mean that digital photography is somehow wrong. It means these photographers need to learn some smarts...
Now here's a question for you: Let's say you have just shot your last roll of film out in the wild somewhere, wasting it on pictures of zebras and whatnot, and then you finally DO see the alien ship landing, how exactly are you going to get a picture of THAT? At least with a digital camera, you will never run out of film...
Nice try, but really disk space is absurdly cheap compared to actual shelf space in a warehouse or library somewhere. A realativly cheap 100 gig tape backup could archive thousands of huge high quality images or literally millions of mid-quality jpegs. Of course, the half-life of a tape drive may nor be more than a few years (I don't know for sure), but before too long we will have non-magnetic, non-biodegradable media that lasts for centuries with similar or even greater capacity.
Imagine trying to connect to a crisis assistance site after a devastating earthquake, only to find its(sic) among a vast IP group being blocked by RBL. People can die as the result of their blind imprecision. They MUST be regulated
Imagine trying to connect to a crisis assistance site after a devastating earthquake, only to find it's down for routine maintenance. People can die as the result of their innocent actions. They MUST be regulated
Imagine trying to connect to a crisis assistance site after a devastating earthquake, only to find it's being used by a gay, asian-Italian midget murderer with a surly additude and a switchbalde made out of uranium inload with gerbil bones who not only won't let you use the computer, but will also KILL you and your family! Can you imagine the lives that could be lost in such situations as this?!? SOMETHING MUST BE DONE!
As it doesn't mention *water* anywhere, just for kicks I would fill the bottle up with a liquid right on the verge of vaporizing at room temperature when kept at a pressure less than 70psi. As long as the car is kept cool and pressurised, it will stay in liquid form, but as soon as it starts slushing around and depressurising, the liquid will begin to vaporize and ramp up the pressure. Additionally, since you don't actually have to have the liquid escaping (as long as the liquid remains, you will have a very hefty supply of gas), only the gas, you will be under acceleration for the entire trip!
...Amazingly, with all these errors and warnings, most of that software continues to run. Compare that with the way typical windows applications work (Crash on the first error and take out something important on your way down), that sounds like excellent error handling to me....
I remember very well a little event in elementary school that changed my life forever. I had grown up in private school until grade 4, but eventually I guess it was getting too expensive and I was sent into the wild world of public school for the first time starting during the fifth grade. Now, since, until this time, I was always taught to try hard, be good, and be the best person I could be, you can imagine the little hell that I found myself in that year...
Anyway, I slowly learned the ropes, but I was still what one might call a "good kid". I didn't chew gum or talk or pass notes, instead I just tried my best to learn and not be a trouble maker. There were two girls who sat next to me, however, who were definitly not "good kids", at least by the elementary school rules of a decade or two ago. They were always laughing and talking and telling jokes, despite the teacher's constant warnings and threats to "put thier names in the book".
Anyway, this went on for a while, and eventually the teacher had a brilliant idea. She decided that for every day that these two girls did NOT talk, they would get a coupon. If they collected a certian number of coupons at the end of two weeks, they could have a pizza party with some of thier friends after school.
Now, for all of you thinking that this novel approach was the way to go, you are sadly mistaken. The next effect of this was that:
a) the girls didn't shift any more towards the "good" side, but instead found better ways of concealing themselves so that they could get the coupons.
and, most importantly, b) I learned that being "good" got you absolutely nothing at all. I was completely ignored bu this teacher. Being bad, however, gets you pizza. From that moment on I was an encouragable student...
If you are going to start giving perks away to those who are bad, you will only be teaching people that there is no reason to stay out of trouble. If you want to go around handing out web training, start with the people who DESERVE it first.
Ack! I'm sorry to tell you that in my expierence, writing a "quick and dirty" java app is not only faster than the same app in VB, but it usually works right the first time and it's bugs are easy to understand and fix.
I have been working as the sole Java developer in a VB den for the last few months, and what I have seen is, no offense to VB developers, some of the absolutly worst coding I have ever seen. It isn't becuase they don't know the ins and out of coding, but that VB as a language, in addition to the various Windows APIs, is/are so poorly structured that writing code correctly actually turns out to be a very difficult if not impossible thing. VB may *seem* quicker due to it's visual element, but when you actually work it out, that turns out to not be the case.
Just out of curiosity, I was wondering if there isn't a hidden message in this, after all, Disney is famous for putting hidden messages in thier work. I am particularly cusious about "Dijonay", which is pronounced correctly sounds kind of like "Disney"... And this is the guy "spreading the word" about EZ-Jackster. Things are afoot at Disney, methinks...
I admit I haven't seen the show, but how couldanyone think that a rap star named "Sir Paid-a-lot" helps to advocate anti-piracy? Unless there are some serious differences between the "review" and the actual show, this sounds a whole lot like a PRO-Piracy cartoon.
I can see you haven't worked with Microsoft software very much, so I'll give you the solution: Reinstall your machine.
It's *just that simple*, can you believe it? Every time Nimda hits your machine, just wipe out the system drives, reformat and re-install! Easy, right? Sure you may have to reinstall 40 or 50 times a day, but again, if you are familiar with M$ software, you'll know you need tons of backup machines that you can swap out as needed with your infected machines. Make an assembly line of it. Have one guy reformatting, another guy reinstalling and a third guy disconnecting the infected boxes and plugging the fresh machines into the network!
Ask yourself this, which is more dangerous to your business?
A) Skr1pt Kiddi3z who will enter your system and possibly scrawl "I love you rhonda!" on your front page.
B) Highly professional "black hat" who will enter your system, steal your new revolutionary prototype plans and provide them for a small charge to your competitor who will get it to market six months before you.
The current system allows lots of the first kind, but helps prevent many of the second. Microsoft's proposal will reverse this. High profile attacks generally do very little "real" damage, normally just some downtime or some ugly defacements. The attacks that you don't see, or in this case, WON'T EVER SEE, are the ones that will turn your business from market leader to bankruptcy auction...
K-locs are a VERY poor way of measuring the quality of code. The company that I did some work for this last year had over 50 MEG of code (I have no ide how many lines of code that equals out to), but it was a shoddy, buggy, ugly glom of crapola... With some very intelligent design I was able to recreate the exact same functionality of this monstrosity is around 15k lines, minus the bugs, the inefficency, and the generally poor quality programming.
Enterprise applications do not have to be huge, they do not have to be lumbering, bloated slugs. They can be just as tight and quick as your tiny programs if done correctly.
Slashdot Mirror
see, there's this problem: you're a successful musician, and the record company appears to be ripping you off. they probably are. but a large part of the apparent rip off is because they are also making lossy investments in new artists which never work out.
How is a record company any different from, say, a Venture Capatalist? Well, that's easy: A VC is willing to eat a loss, but a record company isn't... Part of this is based on business models. A VC is looking for a group that will be successful for a *long time*, one that can make a billion a year, every year. A record company, on the other hand, is looking for a flash in the pan. Somone who can make them a quick couple of hundred million before burning out. A VC can afford to lose on 9 out of 10 investements becuase that one that is successful will be around for a while and continue to bring in more money. This is not the case for record companies, becuase, with some exceptions, of course, even thier most successful artists aren't usually *continuously* profitable.
By openining McAfee up to the "FBI Virus", they are obviously opening it up to any "similar, but malicious" viruses. The only way to guarantee that it will work, it will have to be able to compare the virus byte-for-byte with the FBI virus. For it to do that, it must quite literally have a copy of this virus buried internally in the virus definition file. Since you have a copy of the virus coming packaged with McAfee, why doesn't McAfee just INSTALL THE VIRUS when requested to do so by the FBI. That would solve the probelm of allowing other "cracker" versions of the virus on to the system, since they will be installed locally by McAfee itself... Of course, this makes no sense for an anti-virus company to be intentionally installing viruses, but whatever.
It is only a matter of time until this spreads to higher government, at which time we will filter out all important but secular information out of the internet. All scientific books will be banned because they can enable a person to question god, create explosives, toxic gases, or drugs. That is of course if current trends continue.
But then, after we have banned all the "dangerous" books (Harry Potter included), melted all the guns, GPS tagged all the citizens, filtered all the email, had the bible be the only officially allowed carry-on, and surrounded ourselves with missle defence shields, FINALLY we will be 100% safe from ALL the Bad Things...
A) By making each piece of sensitive information harder to get to, you make it exponentially more time consuming to query FROM vast realms of it. e.g., if the terrorists wanted to know the exact engineering specifications used for all the nuclear plants around the country to look for a particularly weak design.
B) By making information harder to come by, we can up the ante by forcing the terrorists as a GROUP, to become more sophisticated/educated. e.g., the size of the effort rules out the few top level people, but the scope/difficult rules out the average ignorant terrorist.
C) By making information harder to come by, we can make the act of looking for that information much riskier. For instance, rather than merely having to go online or to any public library (anonymously), they must go to a few enumerated locations and risk being spotted and/or creating a trail after the fact.
So, by this logic, the only terrorists left will be those who are patient, intelligent, and willing to take incredible risks. By circumventing the flow of information you won't make the terrorists go away, you know. Instead you'll make them smarter, more educated, make them plan more carefully, and make them REALLY commit to a task mentally and spiritually, becuase they will know the risks are great.
How does this argument end up being for the destruction of public records?
Sure you will, just go out to an Irish pub in Greece that serves food!
When I lived in Japan, I had an Asahi toilet (Yep, the same company that makes the beer.)
It's Voltaire you are referring to: "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to speak it."
Well, that's not exactly true. Fusion power would produce far more energy than oil or gas and be very safe and clean.
I know this will sound silly, but it works for some reason. If you are sending a resume to one of those "resumes@foo.com" or "jobs@bar.com", most likely you will see it filed away and never see a human response. A trick I learned (by accident) is to send an email to one of these addresses talking about your "attached" resume ("As you can see by my skills x and y in my resume blah blah..."), but *don't* actually attach it. 90% of the time you will get an email back from a *person* (i.e. not an autoresponder) asking if you could try and send it again. Now you have an actual email address of somone in H.R. that you can use to send polite emails concering the status of your application, etc.
I know many people will scoff at this idea saying "No self respecting tech company will hire you if you show you're too stupid to be able to attach a resume!" But this isn;t the case. Most of the people who work in HR are the types who find it perfectly resonable to make a mistake and forget to press the "attach" button, or else they are the types that believe whole-heartedly that attachements can get "lost in the mail" even if it's email.
Once you have an actual person (sometimes including a phone number!) you have the chance to add a little "human touch". As long as you are polite and don't make yourself look bad, this extra little boost can be what seperates you from the rest of teh stack of resumes.
I saw a giant green blob today too, here in San Francisco. It was from 8:15 to about 10:00. Reportedly it was caused by Pixar... Oh, and there was a strange Star Wars teaser before the blob started...
This is the remedy for all companies in the IT industry - not just Microsoft.
Wow, this is so right! Very few people understand that closing protocals does nothing but hurt everyone, INCLUDING your partners and yourself. The last company I worked for was a Microsoft "Partner" developing some business web-service things. Well, we had been developing for over two years and could simply not turn out a product. What was our problem? Over 90% of the work we were doing was fscking around with SOAP interop problems between the jillion ever-so-slightly-different implementations of SOAP and WSDL. Actual business logic took, perhaps, 2-4 months of coding work, the rest of that time was completely and totally focused on getting the "plumbing" to work. If standards were really solidified and not moving targets, we could have been out on the market a year ago...
I am pants-free man! The one brave enough to free himself of the confines of lower body clothing! Bow before me!
I sure will be bowing before you do, because, frankly, when it's time for you to bow I hope to be out of the room!
Yes you can still destory the pictures and/or negatives, but that is done later, not live at the scene.
I've seen enough episones of the "Brady Bunch" to know that opening the back of your camera by accident (or by dropping it) is a very easy way to erase all your pictures "live at the scene".
All the photographers shooting with digital thought: "ah, a nothing shot" and deleted it. When the story broke and the shit hit the fan, who was the one still photographer who had a shot of this? The one shooting on film.
This is the fault of the photographers and not the medium. I could take a picture of a sports game with a regular camera and think to myself "aw it's a nothing shot" and set it and it's negative on fire in an ashtray. Despite the fact that in the upper left corner was the conclusive proof of the existance of UFO's and a face shot of the "real killers" to the JFK assassinations and the Nicole Brown stabbings both shaking hands with Bin Ladin, I still will have destroyed the pictures.
Just because some photographers are either too poor to buy a zip-disk and a few extra batteries or else too lazy or stupid to archive thier images doesn't mean that digital photography is somehow wrong. It means these photographers need to learn some smarts...
Now here's a question for you: Let's say you have just shot your last roll of film out in the wild somewhere, wasting it on pictures of zebras and whatnot, and then you finally DO see the alien ship landing, how exactly are you going to get a picture of THAT? At least with a digital camera, you will never run out of film...
Nice try, but really disk space is absurdly cheap compared to actual shelf space in a warehouse or library somewhere. A realativly cheap 100 gig tape backup could archive thousands of huge high quality images or literally millions of mid-quality jpegs. Of course, the half-life of a tape drive may nor be more than a few years (I don't know for sure), but before too long we will have non-magnetic, non-biodegradable media that lasts for centuries with similar or even greater capacity.
Imagine trying to connect to a crisis assistance site after a devastating earthquake, only to find its(sic) among a vast IP group being blocked by RBL. People can die as the result of their blind imprecision. They MUST be regulated
Imagine trying to connect to a crisis assistance site after a devastating earthquake, only to find it's down for routine maintenance. People can die as the result of their innocent actions. They MUST be regulated
Imagine trying to connect to a crisis assistance site after a devastating earthquake, only to find it's being used by a gay, asian-Italian midget murderer with a surly additude and a switchbalde made out of uranium inload with gerbil bones who not only won't let you use the computer, but will also KILL you and your family! Can you imagine the lives that could be lost in such situations as this?!? SOMETHING MUST BE DONE!
As it doesn't mention *water* anywhere, just for kicks I would fill the bottle up with a liquid right on the verge of vaporizing at room temperature when kept at a pressure less than 70psi. As long as the car is kept cool and pressurised, it will stay in liquid form, but as soon as it starts slushing around and depressurising, the liquid will begin to vaporize and ramp up the pressure. Additionally, since you don't actually have to have the liquid escaping (as long as the liquid remains, you will have a very hefty supply of gas), only the gas, you will be under acceleration for the entire trip!
...Amazingly, with all these errors and warnings, most of that software continues to run. Compare that with the way typical windows applications work (Crash on the first error and take out something important on your way down), that sounds like excellent error handling to me....
Just my $0.02
I remember very well a little event in elementary school that changed my life forever. I had grown up in private school until grade 4, but eventually I guess it was getting too expensive and I was sent into the wild world of public school for the first time starting during the fifth grade. Now, since, until this time, I was always taught to try hard, be good, and be the best person I could be, you can imagine the little hell that I found myself in that year...
Anyway, I slowly learned the ropes, but I was still what one might call a "good kid". I didn't chew gum or talk or pass notes, instead I just tried my best to learn and not be a trouble maker. There were two girls who sat next to me, however, who were definitly not "good kids", at least by the elementary school rules of a decade or two ago. They were always laughing and talking and telling jokes, despite the teacher's constant warnings and threats to "put thier names in the book".
Anyway, this went on for a while, and eventually the teacher had a brilliant idea. She decided that for every day that these two girls did NOT talk, they would get a coupon. If they collected a certian number of coupons at the end of two weeks, they could have a pizza party with some of thier friends after school.
Now, for all of you thinking that this novel approach was the way to go, you are sadly mistaken. The next effect of this was that:
a) the girls didn't shift any more towards the "good" side, but instead found better ways of concealing themselves so that they could get the coupons.
and, most importantly, b) I learned that being "good" got you absolutely nothing at all. I was completely ignored bu this teacher. Being bad, however, gets you pizza. From that moment on I was an encouragable student...
If you are going to start giving perks away to those who are bad, you will only be teaching people that there is no reason to stay out of trouble. If you want to go around handing out web training, start with the people who DESERVE it first.
Ack! I'm sorry to tell you that in my expierence, writing a "quick and dirty" java app is not only faster than the same app in VB, but it usually works right the first time and it's bugs are easy to understand and fix.
I have been working as the sole Java developer in a VB den for the last few months, and what I have seen is, no offense to VB developers, some of the absolutly worst coding I have ever seen. It isn't becuase they don't know the ins and out of coding, but that VB as a language, in addition to the various Windows APIs, is/are so poorly structured that writing code correctly actually turns out to be a very difficult if not impossible thing. VB may *seem* quicker due to it's visual element, but when you actually work it out, that turns out to not be the case.
Just out of curiosity, I was wondering if there isn't a hidden message in this, after all, Disney is famous for putting hidden messages in thier work. I am particularly cusious about "Dijonay", which is pronounced correctly sounds kind of like "Disney"... And this is the guy "spreading the word" about EZ-Jackster. Things are afoot at Disney, methinks...
I admit I haven't seen the show, but how couldanyone think that a rap star named "Sir Paid-a-lot" helps to advocate anti-piracy? Unless there are some serious differences between the "review" and the actual show, this sounds a whole lot like a PRO-Piracy cartoon.
I can see you haven't worked with Microsoft software very much, so I'll give you the solution: Reinstall your machine.
It's *just that simple*, can you believe it? Every time Nimda hits your machine, just wipe out the system drives, reformat and re-install! Easy, right? Sure you may have to reinstall 40 or 50 times a day, but again, if you are familiar with M$ software, you'll know you need tons of backup machines that you can swap out as needed with your infected machines. Make an assembly line of it. Have one guy reformatting, another guy reinstalling and a third guy disconnecting the infected boxes and plugging the fresh machines into the network!
Now, where do you want to go today?
Ask yourself this, which is more dangerous to your business?
A) Skr1pt Kiddi3z who will enter your system and possibly scrawl "I love you rhonda!" on your front page.
B) Highly professional "black hat" who will enter your system, steal your new revolutionary prototype plans and provide them for a small charge to your competitor who will get it to market six months before you.
The current system allows lots of the first kind, but helps prevent many of the second. Microsoft's proposal will reverse this. High profile attacks generally do very little "real" damage, normally just some downtime or some ugly defacements. The attacks that you don't see, or in this case, WON'T EVER SEE, are the ones that will turn your business from market leader to bankruptcy auction...
K-locs are a VERY poor way of measuring the quality of code. The company that I did some work for this last year had over 50 MEG of code (I have no ide how many lines of code that equals out to), but it was a shoddy, buggy, ugly glom of crapola... With some very intelligent design I was able to recreate the exact same functionality of this monstrosity is around 15k lines, minus the bugs, the inefficency, and the generally poor quality programming.
Enterprise applications do not have to be huge, they do not have to be lumbering, bloated slugs. They can be just as tight and quick as your tiny programs if done correctly.