And in some cases, even read access can be risky -- I've seen production web sites with resources linking back to development server URIs. It's a good idea to firewall your production servers in such a way that it is not possible for them to reach resources on development servers. This shouldn't prevent developers from being able to read the files on the production server, though.
Development and production support are different roles even though it makes sense to have the developer perform both roles due to their unique understanding. I do both. If you want me to troubleshoot your system efficiently I had better have read access. I do not want write access. I've seen people make mistakes with write access that have almost cost them their job. In fact I've come to the conclusion that ideally your production and development systems should not just be firewalled but that they should be on completely different networks accessed via completely different machines. Then a developer can't easily mistake their production link for a dev link. You're either on a dev box or a prod box. Sharing data between the two should be done using physical media.
Apparently not. I found it quite humorous. It's nice to see some insight into a process like this from someone with a sense of humor and the ability to laugh at things that make him angry.
Well if you want funny you should come to Martin Place, Sydney, Australia. Today I couldn't help but laugh when I saw the giant plastic inflatable whale and baby (I'm talking 2 storey at least, and the length of a large bus) some "green" charity had set up, which had a pump running on a diesel or petrol generator. I was amused enough that I stopped and took crappy mobile phone pictures. Do these jokers even understand the irony?
Yah, but for the 1 guy whose performance increases 10x after using Facebook, 100 other employees performance will decrease 2x.
What you're saying is that you are employing people you have to babysit. If you pay peanuts you get monkeys. Trying to solve your problem by firing one monkey and replace with another monkey is just idiotic. Try hiring decent people and offering them training, personal development and advancement opportunities. They'll be motivated to do good work 90% of the time. Trying to push that to 92% by spying will only put you right back at no one decent wanting to work for you and again you're stuck with monkeys and babies..
The fact that the charges were withdrawn on the same day they were filed suggests that the CIA may not be involved after all -- they would do a better job than that.
That's what they want you to think. It's the old "Would you believe we're this incompetent?" ploy. Very cunning;-)
Run around like headless chickens predicting the end of Microsoft, and Windows, rant and rave about the virtues of Linux, how there are no Linux viruses and how any year now it will be the year of the desktop, and generally feel smug.
you would be correct to criticize bias either for or against hurd or fisher, if the case just broke
but we're into culpability territory now: would the guy fold so quickly and thoroughly if he were innocent?
I see. So if the guy quits for any reason you take that as an admission of guilt. I guess some people never heard of the concept of innocence until guilt is proven.
sexual harassment is pretty serious. one would think we should be more sympathetic to jodie fisher, not hurd. oh right, his browsing history was used against him. therefore, we should be sympathetic to him (rolls eyes)
Pardon me if I'm sympathetic to neither since I know neither party nor do I know the exact circumstances. A woman making a sexual harassment claim should neither immediately receive sympathy nor suspicion. Likewise claims of spying or overstepping the bounds of what might be considered reasonable surveillance is not something anyone should automatically have a knee-jerk reaction to. The bias you are seeing is because you are on a geek message board not a feminist message board.
Is it because you're goal oriented (meaning you can't get motivated to spend time writing unit test code)? If so you need to do a little growing up and realise that ALL untested code is garbage.
Or is it because you're doing it by hand (which means it's boring and laborious)? In which case the solution is obivous - you like coding, so write the code to do the job for you.
Either way you need to adjust your attitude or find a different job. A coder saying they dont' test is like a pilot saying he can't be bothered with paper work or a landing checklist.
Right now people have 100% control over their information and can strip whatever data they like.
You make a lot of assumptions about the average person's intelligence regarding technology.* You're certainly correct that it's their responsibility, but if it isn't so hard to remove that data, why can't the upload service do it anyway? Think of it as offering extra service to one's customers.
*One might argue this period could be moved two words to the left.
Yes and lets remove the tips from sharp tools too, so people can't hurt themselves. If the problem is that people are not knowledgeable enough to use the technology there's no good substitute for education. Certainly breaking things to idiot proof them isn't a good idea.
This is why upload services should simply just strip out the un-needed info of the pictures.
Why is it up to the upload service? Right now people have 100% control over their information and can strip whatever data they like. You might argue the upload service could provide a tool to help them do it more easily by setting preferences (which they could alter on a per upload basis). However I don't want a provider determining what information I can or can't attach to the photos. What if I'm actually trying to put together a map with photos attached. For instance I went to a lot of trouble to combine information from camera and GPS into geotags for my 2007 Honeymoon. The information a thief might gleam from this is to say the least minimal as it was a one off and I wouldn't appreciate my work being undone.
...because you have to sort out the garbage from the truth after you narrow down what you're looking for. and that requires effort. That doesn't mean all information is low value or has negative value. Take a look at the Internet. I might google specialist information, but i'm much more likely to go to a specialist source such as arxiv for astronomy or pubmed for medical literature because I know that information is higher quality than every nut job's take on Relativity or Immunology.
The man who wants to be Australia's next Prime Minister, Tony Abbott, said today 'This idea that "hey presto" we are suddenly going to get 10 times the speed from something that isn't even built yet I find utterly implausible.'"
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." -- Arthur C. Clarke
Our Australian politicians are all turnips who don't understand technology - syousef
Nothing went wrong at Yahoo because Yahoo never had anything of value to sell. It was all Internet bubble hype. They had a semi-decent email offering and a web catalog. It's amazing they did as much as they did.
And the goal for us as humans is to use our logic to overcome our emotions. There, I have now saved you 20 minutes of your life!
Actually I find the TED talks are usually quite entertaining and this was no exception. I found the details of the experiments and how those concepts were tested were well worth 20 minutes.
"The upgrades will probably be carefully chosen"(...)
No body plans for a catastrophe.
I said that foreseeing answers like yours. They're bringing in SECURITY updates.
Yes because they are magical and never break anything. Nor could such a mechanism ever be targeted for an exploit itself, could it/ Hackers must be wetting themselves. Updates you can't turn off.
Besides that, I think they're smart enough to do some private testing before sending them to the wild.
Smart doesn't mean infallible. Testing can't ever guarantee you've missed nothing. Did the Firefox team intend to introduce the vulnerability in the first place? No. Well if not what makes you think this process will fare any better?
Additionally, they give you the chance of disabling that feature.
I'm reading that this won't be allowed. If it is allowed I don't have as big an issue, though it is still one more thing I could forget to turn off - out out sucks - and I would want to be able to configure it before first automatic update.
Do you actually think that a security update is going to break that much? And don't bring me old examples, because those are, as it says, "old".
You want me to bring you examples from the future? Fucking hell.
Now that the team has made this decision, them they will surely think carefully before sending out updates.
Are you implying they were careless before?
And if a bug does come out on the wild, it won't be that much of a deal, as an update is sent to fix a security bug.
...if it hasn't broken the browser or allowed malicious code by mistake...
I'd rather not have a browser running because it had a faulty updated than browsing with known security "breaches".
I'd rather have the browser *I* have tested on my system running.
Sure, I'd be pissed off that they let something like that out, but that could happen with anything I own and I want to be as safe as possible. Besides, as I said, you can disable it if that pisses you off that much, get over yourself.
Well I was being sarcastic, but trying to avoid getting personal. But as you've let that slip, why don't you fucking get a clue. All this is going to do is make more IT departments ban Firefox, and the first slight issue will turn users off the browser. It is a browser that targets advanced users. The main reason to use it has always been extensions. Advanced users don't like being opted into shit.
Yeah it's all sugar and cream till a silent update breaks the browser or worse.
There's a reason people don't update. Some updates are a cure worse than the disease.
I see the Firefox team pushing things that some users will despise more and more. Where I come from that's called arrogance. If this browser goes the way of Netscape this is the most likely reason.
TL;DR (because not everyone enjoys a long-winded and rambling essay): I just graduated from high school and took the CS courses available; both the basic and more advanced courses were held back less by their content than by the several levels of incompetence of the teacher (and it's a total shame.)
That belonged at the START of your post. You clearly didn't learn about front focus in highschool. Since it appeared only at the end of your long rambling essay, it only served to annoy the reader.
Slashdot Mirror
There's protecting your innovation, trademarks, rights, etc. and then there's being a giant muppet. Facebook is a giant muppet.
I think you'll find that muppet is copyrighted, trademarked and patented ;-)
And in some cases, even read access can be risky -- I've seen production web sites with resources linking back to development server URIs. It's a good idea to firewall your production servers in such a way that it is not possible for them to reach resources on development servers. This shouldn't prevent developers from being able to read the files on the production server, though.
Development and production support are different roles even though it makes sense to have the developer perform both roles due to their unique understanding. I do both. If you want me to troubleshoot your system efficiently I had better have read access. I do not want write access. I've seen people make mistakes with write access that have almost cost them their job. In fact I've come to the conclusion that ideally your production and development systems should not just be firewalled but that they should be on completely different networks accessed via completely different machines. Then a developer can't easily mistake their production link for a dev link. You're either on a dev box or a prod box. Sharing data between the two should be done using physical media.
"ATTENTION PEDESTRIANS! This vehicle is accelerating uncontrollably while an elderly man panics in the drivers seat! Please make way!"
"Coming through! Get the fuck out of the way or get trampled! On your bike! Fuck off now! Except you - stay right there so I can pound ya!"
"Alert! Attention! Dickhead pseudo-environmentalist with a hybrid coming! Get out of the way or get a smug lecture!"
Apparently not. I found it quite humorous. It's nice to see some insight into a process like this from someone with a sense of humor and the ability to laugh at things that make him angry.
Well if you want funny you should come to Martin Place, Sydney, Australia. Today I couldn't help but laugh when I saw the giant plastic inflatable whale and baby (I'm talking 2 storey at least, and the length of a large bus) some "green" charity had set up, which had a pump running on a diesel or petrol generator. I was amused enough that I stopped and took crappy mobile phone pictures. Do these jokers even understand the irony?
Yah, but for the 1 guy whose performance increases 10x after using Facebook, 100 other employees performance will decrease 2x.
What you're saying is that you are employing people you have to babysit. If you pay peanuts you get monkeys. Trying to solve your problem by firing one monkey and replace with another monkey is just idiotic. Try hiring decent people and offering them training, personal development and advancement opportunities. They'll be motivated to do good work 90% of the time. Trying to push that to 92% by spying will only put you right back at no one decent wanting to work for you and again you're stuck with monkeys and babies..
The fact that the charges were withdrawn on the same day they were filed suggests that the CIA may not be involved after all -- they would do a better job than that.
That's what they want you to think. It's the old "Would you believe we're this incompetent?" ploy. Very cunning ;-)
Ahhhh shit! Time to learn another fucking language and 10 more over-engineered libraries! So much for time with the family.
(Heck -- my coffee-maker probably violates them!)
Foiled by the old Java patent
So what're we supposed to do?
Run around like headless chickens predicting the end of Microsoft, and Windows, rant and rave about the virtues of Linux, how there are no Linux viruses and how any year now it will be the year of the desktop, and generally feel smug.
You're new here, aren't you?
you would be correct to criticize bias either for or against hurd or fisher, if the case just broke
but we're into culpability territory now: would the guy fold so quickly and thoroughly if he were innocent?
I see. So if the guy quits for any reason you take that as an admission of guilt. I guess some people never heard of the concept of innocence until guilt is proven.
sexual harassment is pretty serious. one would think we should be more sympathetic to jodie fisher, not hurd. oh right, his browsing history was used against him. therefore, we should be sympathetic to him (rolls eyes)
Pardon me if I'm sympathetic to neither since I know neither party nor do I know the exact circumstances. A woman making a sexual harassment claim should neither immediately receive sympathy nor suspicion. Likewise claims of spying or overstepping the bounds of what might be considered reasonable surveillance is not something anyone should automatically have a knee-jerk reaction to. The bias you are seeing is because you are on a geek message board not a feminist message board.
Why, because we use our technological advances to feed our more primal desires? Been that way for thousands of years. We are still here......
Good joke: Why did man first walk upright? A: To free his hands for masturbation.
Yeah but the joke's on man because now he can no longer suck his own dick.
Why do you hate testing?
Is it because you're goal oriented (meaning you can't get motivated to spend time writing unit test code)? If so you need to do a little growing up and realise that ALL untested code is garbage.
Or is it because you're doing it by hand (which means it's boring and laborious)? In which case the solution is obivous - you like coding, so write the code to do the job for you.
Either way you need to adjust your attitude or find a different job. A coder saying they dont' test is like a pilot saying he can't be bothered with paper work or a landing checklist.
...is what BFG customers were.
Right now people have 100% control over their information and can strip whatever data they like.
You make a lot of assumptions about the average person's intelligence regarding technology.* You're certainly correct that it's their responsibility, but if it isn't so hard to remove that data, why can't the upload service do it anyway? Think of it as offering extra service to one's customers.
*One might argue this period could be moved two words to the left.
Yes and lets remove the tips from sharp tools too, so people can't hurt themselves. If the problem is that people are not knowledgeable enough to use the technology there's no good substitute for education. Certainly breaking things to idiot proof them isn't a good idea.
This is why upload services should simply just strip out the un-needed info of the pictures.
Why is it up to the upload service? Right now people have 100% control over their information and can strip whatever data they like. You might argue the upload service could provide a tool to help them do it more easily by setting preferences (which they could alter on a per upload basis). However I don't want a provider determining what information I can or can't attach to the photos. What if I'm actually trying to put together a map with photos attached. For instance I went to a lot of trouble to combine information from camera and GPS into geotags for my 2007 Honeymoon. The information a thief might gleam from this is to say the least minimal as it was a one off and I wouldn't appreciate my work being undone.
...because you have to sort out the garbage from the truth after you narrow down what you're looking for. and that requires effort. That doesn't mean all information is low value or has negative value. Take a look at the Internet. I might google specialist information, but i'm much more likely to go to a specialist source such as arxiv for astronomy or pubmed for medical literature because I know that information is higher quality than every nut job's take on Relativity or Immunology.
I use to love Altavista. Judging by the yoyo moderation on my post people like Yahoo more. *shrug* It's still the truth - Yahoo was just a directory.
The man who wants to be Australia's next Prime Minister, Tony Abbott, said today 'This idea that "hey presto" we are suddenly going to get 10 times the speed from something that isn't even built yet I find utterly implausible.'"
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." -- Arthur C. Clarke
Our Australian politicians are all turnips who don't understand technology - syousef
Nothing went wrong at Yahoo because Yahoo never had anything of value to sell. It was all Internet bubble hype. They had a semi-decent email offering and a web catalog. It's amazing they did as much as they did.
And the goal for us as humans is to use our logic to overcome our emotions. There, I have now saved you 20 minutes of your life!
Actually I find the TED talks are usually quite entertaining and this was no exception. I found the details of the experiments and how those concepts were tested were well worth 20 minutes.
Bazinga!
"The upgrades will probably be carefully chosen"(...)
No body plans for a catastrophe.
I said that foreseeing answers like yours. They're bringing in SECURITY updates.
Yes because they are magical and never break anything. Nor could such a mechanism ever be targeted for an exploit itself, could it/ Hackers must be wetting themselves. Updates you can't turn off.
Besides that, I think they're smart enough to do some private testing before sending them to the wild.
Smart doesn't mean infallible. Testing can't ever guarantee you've missed nothing. Did the Firefox team intend to introduce the vulnerability in the first place? No. Well if not what makes you think this process will fare any better?
Additionally, they give you the chance of disabling that feature.
I'm reading that this won't be allowed. If it is allowed I don't have as big an issue, though it is still one more thing I could forget to turn off - out out sucks - and I would want to be able to configure it before first automatic update.
Do you actually think that a security update is going to break that much? And don't bring me old examples, because those are, as it says, "old".
You want me to bring you examples from the future? Fucking hell.
Now that the team has made this decision, them they will surely think carefully before sending out updates.
Are you implying they were careless before?
And if a bug does come out on the wild, it won't be that much of a deal, as an update is sent to fix a security bug.
...if it hasn't broken the browser or allowed malicious code by mistake...
I'd rather not have a browser running because it had a faulty updated than browsing with known security "breaches".
I'd rather have the browser *I* have tested on my system running.
Sure, I'd be pissed off that they let something like that out, but that could happen with anything I own and I want to be as safe as possible. Besides, as I said, you can disable it if that pisses you off that much, get over yourself.
Well I was being sarcastic, but trying to avoid getting personal. But as you've let that slip, why don't you fucking get a clue. All this is going to do is make more IT departments ban Firefox, and the first slight issue will turn users off the browser. It is a browser that targets advanced users. The main reason to use it has always been extensions. Advanced users don't like being opted into shit.
Yeah it's all sugar and cream till a silent update breaks the browser or worse.
There's a reason people don't update. Some updates are a cure worse than the disease.
I see the Firefox team pushing things that some users will despise more and more. Where I come from that's called arrogance. If this browser goes the way of Netscape this is the most likely reason.
TL;DR (because not everyone enjoys a long-winded and rambling essay): I just graduated from high school and took the CS courses available; both the basic and more advanced courses were held back less by their content than by the several levels of incompetence of the teacher (and it's a total shame.)
That belonged at the START of your post. You clearly didn't learn about front focus in highschool. Since it appeared only at the end of your long rambling essay, it only served to annoy the reader.