Seriously. You good folks get to hunt bugs, leaks, hacks, etc, and the rest of us get to have the benefits of your hard work.
Thanks.
Of course, I run OS-X and XP in VM on a MBP:P but some of my users don't.
We plan to adopt Win7 when XP is pried from our cold, lifeless hands. Or MS stops supporting/patching it. Will almost certainly skip right over Vistard.
Right, here is what happens if you try and implement this:
1. People will do anything to avoid being connected to your domain. They'll hide their computers. They'll buy new computers from a different budget pool, them claim that because they bought them from non-IT department money they can do what they want with them. They'll bring their own computers into work.
2. Your users also spend all of their time trying to hack around your restrictions rather than doing the work you pay them for. It's very hard to lock Windows down totally.
Then you fucking FIRE THEM. Security is not so your users can do whatever the hell they want.
I don't necessarily have a problem with the large contractors getting the bulk of the money, as they typically the companies that have the resources to work on things of this nature.
It's when huge companies get funds to do mundane things that I question our government.
We've all been there, I think. Funny how people take stuff so seriously. But hey, for him I think that car was his baby and his baby got a black eye. Of course, the funny thing in all this is that if he'd spent all of 1 minute on the internet, he'd have known what his car was made of. Oh well.
No, of course they don't. Their OS is not as secure as it could be. A lot of it is due to the huge install base, huge code, etc. The average person who sees an unlocked car doesn't break into it. Those that do are scum.
I'm guessing that "friend" doesn't hang out with you much any more?:P
That's like a buddy getting a new girlfriend and pointing out all the flaws in her rather than the positives. Could you? Sure. Should you? Depends on the friend.
I have a new MBP and use Fusion. I have an XP image and a Vista image loaded up. I have not noticed any unusual power drain, but that's kind of to be expected, IMO. Also, I have to question the wisdom of using a VM session for more than an hour or so on just the battery.
I can see some instances where this would be an issue for some, but this seems like senseless "hating" to me. No, I'm not trying to troll or anything else, I'm just having a hard time figuring out why someone would spend a long-ish amount of time in Fusion running a guest OS on battery power. It seems obvious to me that there are issues running a non-native OS on a laptop designed for a specific OS...
Let's do both. Kill their connection then let the ninja's go all "Mad Max Thunderdome" on them. Two men enter, one ninja leave.
I have no qualms about kicking people off the net if they show they can't work and play well with others. The internet is a luxury, not a right. (at this point, that is indeed starting to change, but people can and have made out ok without it)
Honestly, I'm so sick of the filthy underbelly of the internet being treated just as well as the rest of the world's (mostly) law-abiding citizens.
*Note that I'm not talking about Billy Bob downloading a movie or something, but the more active scammers/spammers/malware/virus writers/propagators out there.
They're scum and oh how I wish I could have a few minutes in a room alone with them, especially after this morning I got to clean yet another laptop of the Vundo crap.
and meetings, holy hell does he go to a metric shit-ton of meetings. Amazing fact, more than half are meetings he didn't actually set up. Weird, that. Only CEO I've ever worked for who goes to most meetings as a participant rather than the chair.
Let's face it, most companies out there use MS Office. And most users of MS Office got used to the setup that hadn't changed in quite a while. When Office 2k7 came out, my CEO wanted it on his computer so he could test it out. As CEO, he reads/edits/writes a lot of documents.
Because of the god-awful changes, it took him quite a while to get up-to-speed. So much time, in fact, that he requested we A) not upgrade anyone else and B) remove it from his machine and put Office 2k3 back on it.
Now, he's not the most technically proficient person out there, but he's better than most (compared to average users I mean) and for him to say it was pretty eye-opening.
I can't comprehend why OOo did this. Not a good idea.
For years, Cisco innovated, created, well, MADE really cool things.
Now, they just buy them. I see Google heading that route.
(cue someone saying that Google still innovates, etc. Yeah, I know. So does Cisco. But all their major stuff in the past, oh, I dunno, 5 years at least, has been purchases of other companies making cool stuff.)
First, they'll set this up on PCs at home. Then it'll be laptops. Then, netbooks.
The next thing you know, you're gonna have to dodge a frigging mindfield of idiots walking around having orgasms (cmon, you KNOW this thing is gonna be used for porn) because wearable computers takes off.
From you? Not really. From people like you, I expect braindead nonsense whenever the subject contains the word "China" or other related subjects.
You have the intelligence of a small rodent. Oh look, I can say unpleasant things about people on the internet too! Woohoo! Look at me, being all uncivil.
You said this drivel "I think it is worth noting that TFA mentions that "a police officer" states that "We are investigating a case where a high school student was beaten to death by his camp supervisors. The case is still under investigation" - IOW, a representative of the local officialdom talks openly about this case to a newsagency, in much the same way as a London police officer would, and refuses to give further details because they are still investigating, just like elsewhere in the world."
LOL, WHAT?!?! You think it's "worth noting" that this time, instead of COVERING UP the whole "beating a kid to death within a day of him coming to the camp where his parents paid money for him to be so he could battle his internet addiction" they actually brought it to light? Never mind the glaring "THEY HAVE A CAMP WHERE THEY SEND KIDS WHO SPEND TIME ON THE INTERNET SO THEY CAN RE-EDUCATE THEM". Yeah, let's gloss right over that point, shall we. No, the news here, for twits like you is that this time, China wasn't able to cover it up.
Here, from the article, since maybe you'll read it here:
"He signed the camp agreement that said it aimed to help children to become independent and rectify their bad habitats by "close management with training teachers."
"Our methods are tough but do not include torture or other methods that might damage a child's health," reads the mission statement.
But his son was put in solitary confinement within hours of his arrival and was then beaten to death by his trainers after they "scolded" him for running too slowly, Deng said."
Only in China would an addiction to the internet, whatever the hell that means = forced running. And not only that, but BEATINGS and solitary confinement when said kid could not "keep up". So good for them for reporting it. LOL, yet you think I'm the one that's brain-dead.
I hope you don't fall off that high horse you're on, you might break your neck or something.
No, I didn't say that. What I said was, IT'S FUCKING CHINA! What do you expect? For every kid that dies in a gaming camp, there's thousands more that simply "disappear".
C'mon. NO, IMO this isn't news for nerds. This is news for politicians.
Look people, tragedies happen all the time. For every poor kid beaten to death in China at a "gaming addiction recovery camp", there's thousands more dying of starvation and illnesses in other parts of the world.
This isn't news. This is China. Do you expect differently?
The funny thing about all this location secrecy is that the majority of the time, if anyone wants to know where (for example) a particular Expeditionary Unit (MEU) is, all they need to do is read one of the trade rags that follows the Corps.
Seriously, my family knew where I was deploying to before I did.
But yeah, this is a non-issue, this is regarding only DOD computers.
Mini-rant: Back in my day, on board ship we barely had email access, and it was used strictly for ship to ship or command to command communications (along with the sat shots, etc). They'll get along fine. Nothing wrong with staying in touch via email, or hell, cell phone.
" Privacy and security: Understanding section 11.1 of our Terms of Service Print We've received questions over time about the meaning of section 11.1 of our Terms of Service. We realize that for those not familiar with legal agreements for services that use the Internet, these terms can look confusing, or even frightening.
The first thing to understand is that this language doesn't give Google ownership rights to your data. You, and you alone, own your content. Whether you wish to keep your content totally private, or share it with the world, that's your choice.
However, in order to honor this choice, Google Docs needs permission to display your content as you see fit. This is what we mean by a "license to reproduce." We need to ensure that when you click the "Publish document" button, or use the "Invite collaborators" option, we have the license to carry out your wishes. It is this agreement, between Google Docs and you, the user, that section 11.1 of our Terms of Service reflects."
Why would you even chance it? That's their EXISTING terms of service, but as always, those terms are subject to change without notice.
Slashdot Mirror
Would suck to have to press hard every time you wanted to start a new sentence. I have to pause typing to "act" like I'm pressing the keys harder.
i guess the best thing would be if we all just typed lower case...
Get this "hardon" two bath tubs outside side-by-side and some Levitra* stat!
*is it Levitra? I don't remember, as I'm not a user of said pills**...yet.
**YMMV
Seriously. You good folks get to hunt bugs, leaks, hacks, etc, and the rest of us get to have the benefits of your hard work.
Thanks.
Of course, I run OS-X and XP in VM on a MBP :P but some of my users don't.
We plan to adopt Win7 when XP is pried from our cold, lifeless hands. Or MS stops supporting/patching it. Will almost certainly skip right over Vistard.
Right, here is what happens if you try and implement this:
1. People will do anything to avoid being connected to your domain. They'll hide their computers. They'll buy new computers from a different budget pool, them claim that because they bought them from non-IT department money they can do what they want with them. They'll bring their own computers into work.
2. Your users also spend all of their time trying to hack around your restrictions rather than doing the work you pay them for. It's very hard to lock Windows down totally.
Then you fucking FIRE THEM. Security is not so your users can do whatever the hell they want.
I don't necessarily have a problem with the large contractors getting the bulk of the money, as they typically the companies that have the resources to work on things of this nature.
It's when huge companies get funds to do mundane things that I question our government.
I am SHOCKED AND CHAGRINED SIR! HARRUMPH!
(I AM YELLING, you stupid filter. Get it straight. *sigh* Thanks a lot, Biff.)
We've all been there, I think. Funny how people take stuff so seriously. But hey, for him I think that car was his baby and his baby got a black eye. Of course, the funny thing in all this is that if he'd spent all of 1 minute on the internet, he'd have known what his car was made of. Oh well.
No, of course they don't. Their OS is not as secure as it could be. A lot of it is due to the huge install base, huge code, etc. The average person who sees an unlocked car doesn't break into it. Those that do are scum.
I'm guessing that "friend" doesn't hang out with you much any more? :P
That's like a buddy getting a new girlfriend and pointing out all the flaws in her rather than the positives. Could you? Sure. Should you? Depends on the friend.
I have a new MBP and use Fusion. I have an XP image and a Vista image loaded up. I have not noticed any unusual power drain, but that's kind of to be expected, IMO. Also, I have to question the wisdom of using a VM session for more than an hour or so on just the battery.
I can see some instances where this would be an issue for some, but this seems like senseless "hating" to me. No, I'm not trying to troll or anything else, I'm just having a hard time figuring out why someone would spend a long-ish amount of time in Fusion running a guest OS on battery power. It seems obvious to me that there are issues running a non-native OS on a laptop designed for a specific OS...
Let's do both. Kill their connection then let the ninja's go all "Mad Max Thunderdome" on them. Two men enter, one ninja leave.
I have no qualms about kicking people off the net if they show they can't work and play well with others. The internet is a luxury, not a right. (at this point, that is indeed starting to change, but people can and have made out ok without it)
Honestly, I'm so sick of the filthy underbelly of the internet being treated just as well as the rest of the world's (mostly) law-abiding citizens.
*Note that I'm not talking about Billy Bob downloading a movie or something, but the more active scammers/spammers/malware/virus writers/propagators out there.
They're scum and oh how I wish I could have a few minutes in a room alone with them, especially after this morning I got to clean yet another laptop of the Vundo crap.
and meetings, holy hell does he go to a metric shit-ton of meetings. Amazing fact, more than half are meetings he didn't actually set up. Weird, that. Only CEO I've ever worked for who goes to most meetings as a participant rather than the chair.
-1, mostly true.
Yeah, you beat me to it.
Let's face it, most companies out there use MS Office. And most users of MS Office got used to the setup that hadn't changed in quite a while. When Office 2k7 came out, my CEO wanted it on his computer so he could test it out. As CEO, he reads/edits/writes a lot of documents.
Because of the god-awful changes, it took him quite a while to get up-to-speed. So much time, in fact, that he requested we A) not upgrade anyone else and B) remove it from his machine and put Office 2k3 back on it.
Now, he's not the most technically proficient person out there, but he's better than most (compared to average users I mean) and for him to say it was pretty eye-opening.
I can't comprehend why OOo did this. Not a good idea.
Gmail? I'd say that's pretty key.
I also didn't say it was a bad thing, it just reminds me of Cisco.
Google is starting to remind me of Cisco.
For years, Cisco innovated, created, well, MADE really cool things.
Now, they just buy them. I see Google heading that route.
(cue someone saying that Google still innovates, etc. Yeah, I know. So does Cisco. But all their major stuff in the past, oh, I dunno, 5 years at least, has been purchases of other companies making cool stuff.)
First, they'll set this up on PCs at home. Then it'll be laptops. Then, netbooks.
The next thing you know, you're gonna have to dodge a frigging mindfield of idiots walking around having orgasms (cmon, you KNOW this thing is gonna be used for porn) because wearable computers takes off.
From you? Not really. From people like you, I expect braindead nonsense whenever the subject contains the word "China" or other related subjects.
You have the intelligence of a small rodent. Oh look, I can say unpleasant things about people on the internet too! Woohoo! Look at me, being all uncivil.
You said this drivel "I think it is worth noting that TFA mentions that "a police officer" states that "We are investigating a case where a high school student was beaten to death by his camp supervisors. The case is still under investigation" - IOW, a representative of the local officialdom talks openly about this case to a newsagency, in much the same way as a London police officer would, and refuses to give further details because they are still investigating, just like elsewhere in the world."
LOL, WHAT?!?! You think it's "worth noting" that this time, instead of COVERING UP the whole "beating a kid to death within a day of him coming to the camp where his parents paid money for him to be so he could battle his internet addiction" they actually brought it to light? Never mind the glaring "THEY HAVE A CAMP WHERE THEY SEND KIDS WHO SPEND TIME ON THE INTERNET SO THEY CAN RE-EDUCATE THEM". Yeah, let's gloss right over that point, shall we. No, the news here, for twits like you is that this time, China wasn't able to cover it up.
Here, from the article, since maybe you'll read it here:
"He signed the camp agreement that said it aimed to help children to become independent and rectify their bad habitats by "close management with training teachers."
"Our methods are tough but do not include torture or other methods that might damage a child's health," reads the mission statement.
But his son was put in solitary confinement within hours of his arrival and was then beaten to death by his trainers after they "scolded" him for running too slowly, Deng said."
Only in China would an addiction to the internet, whatever the hell that means = forced running. And not only that, but BEATINGS and solitary confinement when said kid could not "keep up". So good for them for reporting it. LOL, yet you think I'm the one that's brain-dead.
I hope you don't fall off that high horse you're on, you might break your neck or something.
No, I didn't say that. What I said was, IT'S FUCKING CHINA! What do you expect? For every kid that dies in a gaming camp, there's thousands more that simply "disappear".
C'mon. NO, IMO this isn't news for nerds. This is news for politicians.
Look people, tragedies happen all the time. For every poor kid beaten to death in China at a "gaming addiction recovery camp", there's thousands more dying of starvation and illnesses in other parts of the world.
This isn't news. This is China. Do you expect differently?
(Disclaimer: I served in the Corps)
The funny thing about all this location secrecy is that the majority of the time, if anyone wants to know where (for example) a particular Expeditionary Unit (MEU) is, all they need to do is read one of the trade rags that follows the Corps.
Seriously, my family knew where I was deploying to before I did.
But yeah, this is a non-issue, this is regarding only DOD computers.
Mini-rant: Back in my day, on board ship we barely had email access, and it was used strictly for ship to ship or command to command communications (along with the sat shots, etc). They'll get along fine. Nothing wrong with staying in touch via email, or hell, cell phone.
figures. Don't bother to refute what I said, just call it "troll" and be done with it. Typical.
after clicking a link, Kim is a "him". My bad. Damned gender-implying names...
slashdot requires you to wait 1 minute in between posting. Your time is not up yet.
doo doo doo doo doo doo doo....doo doo doo doo doo doo doo doo. doo doo doo duh duh duh-duht-bum-bum.
So what? I'm not trying to troll here (well, maybe a little) but honestly, who cares?
This whole mentality of "Us against the world" is kinda amusing to me. I guess it's because I'm not a developer, or something, I dunno.
But this is one artist saying "Software X is/was expensive, so I'm using a different and free solution." Ok, great, good for her. So now what?
From here: http://docs.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?answer=82366&ctx=sibling
"
Privacy and security: Understanding section 11.1 of our Terms of Service
Print
We've received questions over time about the meaning of section 11.1 of our Terms of Service. We realize that for those not familiar with legal agreements for services that use the Internet, these terms can look confusing, or even frightening.
The first thing to understand is that this language doesn't give Google ownership rights to your data. You, and you alone, own your content. Whether you wish to keep your content totally private, or share it with the world, that's your choice.
However, in order to honor this choice, Google Docs needs permission to display your content as you see fit. This is what we mean by a "license to reproduce." We need to ensure that when you click the "Publish document" button, or use the "Invite collaborators" option, we have the license to carry out your wishes. It is this agreement, between Google Docs and you, the user, that section 11.1 of our Terms of Service reflects."
Why would you even chance it? That's their EXISTING terms of service, but as always, those terms are subject to change without notice.
I can't imagine that HIPAA would allow this.