Good lord. You seem to forget that the "scary guys in suits" WORK at the pleasure of the U.S. Senate. They are essentially Obama employees.
Not saying they're not McCain employees too, but for Christ sakes man, giving Obama *or* McCain a pass on this ridiculous wiretapping indemnity crap is dangerous and stupid.
It's just big money telco with their hand up both of their asses, making them and the rest of Congress, their meat-puppets.
Technically NOT HAVING KIDS greatly reduces the stress on what otherwise would have been parents.
Personally I keep wondering why people treat having children as not an OPTIONAL thing to do.
People who have kids already get it FAR better in taxes in this country than those of us who CHOOSE not to. You'd think they could suck it up a bit when it comes to taking care of THEIR offspring.
News flash: Stop having kids if you can't afford them.
Not sure what the architecture has to do with incremental changes versus additions. Von Neumann architecture is still used, as is Harvard for a lot of things. (One could argue that most of us "touch" more Harvard devices since that architecture is typically used in just about every microcontroller device, which is just about every little thing that has a button or switch on it -- Von Neumann has a lock on what we would now call "personal computers", but not embedded design.
Meanwhile back at the ranch, you might want to make your point more clear, since you just confirmed what I was saying... the underlying technologies HASN'T changed. Von Neumann, Harvard, who cares? Still the same thing after 20+ years.
People saying the technology is getting better though incremental development is arguable. To do the things modern PC's do, devices beyond the basic Von Neumann processor had to be added. As far as the processors themselves, the technology hasn't changed, the transistors have just gotten faster and more power-efficient.
(Not that programmers take advantage of that... my desktop still runs about the same speed it did in the WFW 3.11 days. Hard drives and RAM got faster, that helped, but not much -- programmers stopped optimizing code for speed/CPU use a long time ago. Crank out the crap... that's the motto.
Faster transistors means someone has been working on the accuracy of the component build (smaller and smaller dies full of lots of transistors) and better doping techniques, but overall computing isn't any different from 20+ years ago UNLESS you factor in ADD ON components on the motherboard, and peripherals outside the PC case.
Could it ultimately be that the reason many IT security professionals are unhappy is that they've known all along that computers CAN be made secure if the code was done right in the first place?
Spending a lifetime covering up the coding "sins" of others gets old after a while. I know, I've been a career tech support guy.
While I've moved "up" to handling very expensive inside-the-carrier-never-touched-by-outsiders telecom gear, which pays a lot better than the desktop -- I still know (and try to explain to folks) that the model isn't "let's code the best possible software we can and make a great product". Instead the reality is... let's code whatever gets this thing shipped and go have a beer, the tech support guys will fix the rest or create procedures to deal with our bugs while being bitched out by customers who know better, and we'll move on to creating the NEXT product that will ship "just in time" with just as many bugs.
The cycle is slower in telecom than the desktop, in an order of magnitude measured in anywhere from 3-7 years, but it's the same merry-go-round it was in 1994 when I started this gig. I took some time "off" in the dot-bomb days building an ISP/data center company, and came back to the same old "problems" that never go away four years ago.
It's a steady paycheck and I do other things besides my work to enjoy myself. Work is utterly boring when you know all the drama of new code releases, new versions, and new products is all just a way to start over when the code gets so crufty no one can fix it anymore.
Yawn...
I think the only place this might not be true is in embedded aerospace code and systems support roles. When people DIE when your code/products suck, you pay attention. Otherwise, at some point the ADD poster-children over in Engineering enamored with some new real-time OS, DSP chip, or coding language, get bored and want to sell something new to justify their existence, and the cycle starts over again.
Fixing up the old system that's tried and true becomes either a) impossible -- too many people left/moved on to "next big thing" or b) boring -- time to build "next big thing".
It's utterly boring. But it keeps me in a job. If they actually coded something perfect, I'd be jobless since there'd be no reason to maintain a tech support contract.
So... I wonder if "security" is similar, except that you get to put out "fires" of a different variety. 80% of my job is political 20% is actually fixing/working on technical things. That's fine with me, but I don't think it's how UPPER management envisions my role. They figure anyone with the same technical training can do it.
My customers whom I've built relationships with for 14 years (with a few years "off" but where we all still kept in touch -- telco is a small world) would certainly disagree. It's more about trust for them than it is about anything else. Downtime is evil, because when they're down they're bleeding real cold hard cash revenues and possibly future contracts, and they know I know that. They don't trust newbies unless they've been vetted by folks they trust. (It's a six month process to "introduce" a new tech, for example.)
Same thing from the security-biz friends I've asked -- their "customer" whether internal in a corporate job, or external in a consulting job, trusts them. Or they wouldn't be there.
But we all know deep-down it's all a huge waste of time, if the code were just correct to begin with...
Polycom unit, you set up the port-forwarding and hook it to a TV for 'em. Better quality and ease of use (remote control and a speed dial you set up) than any webcam-based solution.
Because other than the engine, and maybe rubber and wheel technology, none of those things really CHANGED on cars. There were incremental ADDITIONS to cars, far more than CHANGES.
Oh Linux will survive, because it's built for developers and not for end-users.
Any time you coddle to massive code-heads like the (mostly corporate paid now) kernel devs, it'll keep being re-written and re-written and re-written, but never have to actually meet any quality or professional documentation standards.
Nowadays something like 60% of the kernel devs who actually get code in the kernel are PAID to create this sloppy, nasty, crap -- and think they're professionals.
They keep promising that and not delivering. Well, I take that back...
The kernel works on all hardware except anything new/useful like WiFi cards (those are new?) and other interesting USB gadgetry, and the UI gives you a desktop that looks like it's from 1995 unless you load non-free non-written-here hardware drivers for any modern video card.
Of course you can spend a few hours hacking on every new hardware install to get something working *IF* someone has reverse-engineered how to talk to the doo-hickey -- of course, the main kernel devs aren't much interested in that -- they're too busy coding to use any of those interesting peripherals the mere mortals like to use.
Yeah, he meant to say "completely irrelevant". Kinda like a Ford Model T isn't a "completely broken" car.
Does it do things other cars do? Yes. Well? No.
Would you ever want one for anything other than a collector's item after driving a Ferrari? No.
There are filesystems that real pros use and filesystems that crash and can't be recovered without backups.
And there are some pros who are stuck with the latter or who've never enjoyed real filesystems saving their ass at 3AM, so they just "don't know", but loudly tout that their kiddie filesystems keep up, without having used the real ones.
Gee, I already have a filter for stupid shit, it's called not answering the phone unless I recognize who's calling and actually want to talk to them.
0. Completely unimportant. Don't even bother getting off the couch to pick up the phone for this one.
Don't bother calling. I'll ignore it anyway, and if you're dumb enough to leave voice mail about it, I'll hear about 1 second of it before I hit the delete key and move on.
1. Normal importance. Nothing urgent.
Okay, I'll answer like I usually do if I'm not busy.
2. High importance.
To you maybe, I'll still answer like I usually do if I'm not busy. Call my cell if you have that number. Multiple lines ringing usually indicates you really want to reach me badly, or you're a retard and can't judge priorities. Either way, I'll check the voice mail after you quit calling everything I own.
3. Really high importance. Lives will be lost if you don't take this call.
Call 911 dumbass - leave me the fuck alone.
So, in all -- the simple solution is not to answer the stupid phone every time it rings. Unless you think you're going to get a treat or something.
There are features of the AmEx card (for the consumer, not for the vendor) that are value-adds that many people like.
Probably the biggest is that Visa/MC still don't provide detailed (and I mean REALLY detailed) reports and analysis of spending via the web or at the end of the year.
With AmEx, you can go online anytime and categorize spending by vendor type, etc.
Slashdot Mirror
Good lord. You seem to forget that the "scary guys in suits" WORK at the pleasure of the U.S. Senate. They are essentially Obama employees.
Not saying they're not McCain employees too, but for Christ sakes man, giving Obama *or* McCain a pass on this ridiculous wiretapping indemnity crap is dangerous and stupid.
It's just big money telco with their hand up both of their asses, making them and the rest of Congress, their meat-puppets.
Technically NOT HAVING KIDS greatly reduces the stress on what otherwise would have been parents.
Personally I keep wondering why people treat having children as not an OPTIONAL thing to do.
People who have kids already get it FAR better in taxes in this country than those of us who CHOOSE not to. You'd think they could suck it up a bit when it comes to taking care of THEIR offspring.
News flash: Stop having kids if you can't afford them.
Not sure what the architecture has to do with incremental changes versus additions. Von Neumann architecture is still used, as is Harvard for a lot of things. (One could argue that most of us "touch" more Harvard devices since that architecture is typically used in just about every microcontroller device, which is just about every little thing that has a button or switch on it -- Von Neumann has a lock on what we would now call "personal computers", but not embedded design.
Meanwhile back at the ranch, you might want to make your point more clear, since you just confirmed what I was saying... the underlying technologies HASN'T changed. Von Neumann, Harvard, who cares? Still the same thing after 20+ years.
People saying the technology is getting better though incremental development is arguable. To do the things modern PC's do, devices beyond the basic Von Neumann processor had to be added. As far as the processors themselves, the technology hasn't changed, the transistors have just gotten faster and more power-efficient.
(Not that programmers take advantage of that... my desktop still runs about the same speed it did in the WFW 3.11 days. Hard drives and RAM got faster, that helped, but not much -- programmers stopped optimizing code for speed/CPU use a long time ago. Crank out the crap... that's the motto.
Faster transistors means someone has been working on the accuracy of the component build (smaller and smaller dies full of lots of transistors) and better doping techniques, but overall computing isn't any different from 20+ years ago UNLESS you factor in ADD ON components on the motherboard, and peripherals outside the PC case.
Could it ultimately be that the reason many IT security professionals are unhappy is that they've known all along that computers CAN be made secure if the code was done right in the first place?
Spending a lifetime covering up the coding "sins" of others gets old after a while. I know, I've been a career tech support guy.
While I've moved "up" to handling very expensive inside-the-carrier-never-touched-by-outsiders telecom gear, which pays a lot better than the desktop -- I still know (and try to explain to folks) that the model isn't "let's code the best possible software we can and make a great product". Instead the reality is... let's code whatever gets this thing shipped and go have a beer, the tech support guys will fix the rest or create procedures to deal with our bugs while being bitched out by customers who know better, and we'll move on to creating the NEXT product that will ship "just in time" with just as many bugs.
The cycle is slower in telecom than the desktop, in an order of magnitude measured in anywhere from 3-7 years, but it's the same merry-go-round it was in 1994 when I started this gig. I took some time "off" in the dot-bomb days building an ISP/data center company, and came back to the same old "problems" that never go away four years ago.
It's a steady paycheck and I do other things besides my work to enjoy myself. Work is utterly boring when you know all the drama of new code releases, new versions, and new products is all just a way to start over when the code gets so crufty no one can fix it anymore.
Yawn...
I think the only place this might not be true is in embedded aerospace code and systems support roles. When people DIE when your code/products suck, you pay attention. Otherwise, at some point the ADD poster-children over in Engineering enamored with some new real-time OS, DSP chip, or coding language, get bored and want to sell something new to justify their existence, and the cycle starts over again.
Fixing up the old system that's tried and true becomes either a) impossible -- too many people left/moved on to "next big thing" or b) boring -- time to build "next big thing".
It's utterly boring. But it keeps me in a job. If they actually coded something perfect, I'd be jobless since there'd be no reason to maintain a tech support contract.
So... I wonder if "security" is similar, except that you get to put out "fires" of a different variety. 80% of my job is political 20% is actually fixing/working on technical things. That's fine with me, but I don't think it's how UPPER management envisions my role. They figure anyone with the same technical training can do it.
My customers whom I've built relationships with for 14 years (with a few years "off" but where we all still kept in touch -- telco is a small world) would certainly disagree. It's more about trust for them than it is about anything else. Downtime is evil, because when they're down they're bleeding real cold hard cash revenues and possibly future contracts, and they know I know that. They don't trust newbies unless they've been vetted by folks they trust. (It's a six month process to "introduce" a new tech, for example.)
Same thing from the security-biz friends I've asked -- their "customer" whether internal in a corporate job, or external in a consulting job, trusts them. Or they wouldn't be there.
But we all know deep-down it's all a huge waste of time, if the code were just correct to begin with...
Polycom unit, you set up the port-forwarding and hook it to a TV for 'em. Better quality and ease of use (remote control and a speed dial you set up) than any webcam-based solution.
Because other than the engine, and maybe rubber and wheel technology, none of those things really CHANGED on cars. There were incremental ADDITIONS to cars, far more than CHANGES.
The modern rewrite (OS X) used BSD-licensed code and avoided the non-TRULY-Free GPL like the plague.
Some thoughts. If you think that's all the kernel's doing these days, go look at the source and the options.
Apache isn't a Unix-only application (smartly so on their part).
Anyone with enough skills can simply start over. They don't need Linux's code or it's wacky licensing mess.
Oh yeah, because the end-user usability of Gnome and KDE have gotten SO much better in a decade of crap code with no end-user focus.
Face it, OSS coders don't build incrementally -- they build by throwing shit together.
It's amazingly CREATIVE but it's not designed or managed in any way to get BETTER.
Oh Linux will survive, because it's built for developers and not for end-users.
Any time you coddle to massive code-heads like the (mostly corporate paid now) kernel devs, it'll keep being re-written and re-written and re-written, but never have to actually meet any quality or professional documentation standards.
Nowadays something like 60% of the kernel devs who actually get code in the kernel are PAID to create this sloppy, nasty, crap -- and think they're professionals.
Isn't that quaint? Sure would be nice if Linux had some professional grade documentation someday, eh?
How about shutting down some worthless programs?
Gee that narrowed it right down.
...share, and Adobe doesn't give a flying fuck. And shouldn't.
The "spirit" of open-source? That's a myth.
The real spirit is egotists working on only code that interests them, damn the end-users.
Usability is never primary, documentation is just a hair above that UNLESS there's a book to be published and sold.
Go all the way back to RMS/GNU to see the boilerplate attitude for generations to come...
They keep promising that and not delivering. Well, I take that back...
The kernel works on all hardware except anything new/useful like WiFi cards (those are new?) and other interesting USB gadgetry, and the UI gives you a desktop that looks like it's from 1995 unless you load non-free non-written-here hardware drivers for any modern video card.
Of course you can spend a few hours hacking on every new hardware install to get something working *IF* someone has reverse-engineered how to talk to the doo-hickey -- of course, the main kernel devs aren't much interested in that -- they're too busy coding to use any of those interesting peripherals the mere mortals like to use.
Linux is doing great, haven't you heard?
Self-sufficient or anti-social?
Yeah, he meant to say "completely irrelevant". Kinda like a Ford Model T isn't a "completely broken" car.
Does it do things other cars do? Yes. Well? No.
Would you ever want one for anything other than a collector's item after driving a Ferrari? No.
There are filesystems that real pros use and filesystems that crash and can't be recovered without backups.
And there are some pros who are stuck with the latter or who've never enjoyed real filesystems saving their ass at 3AM, so they just "don't know", but loudly tout that their kiddie filesystems keep up, without having used the real ones.
... always creates the best possible software solutions.
OpenGL can't get their crap together because they have no goals and no rewards for hitting them.
I had a DNS Fortress set up in the living room once. It was fun to hide in the cushions and scare people when they walked by.
0. Completely unimportant. Don't even bother getting off the couch to pick up the phone for this one.
Don't bother calling. I'll ignore it anyway, and if you're dumb enough to leave voice mail about it, I'll hear about 1 second of it before I hit the delete key and move on.
1. Normal importance. Nothing urgent.
Okay, I'll answer like I usually do if I'm not busy.
2. High importance.
To you maybe, I'll still answer like I usually do if I'm not busy. Call my cell if you have that number. Multiple lines ringing usually indicates you really want to reach me badly, or you're a retard and can't judge priorities. Either way, I'll check the voice mail after you quit calling everything I own.
3. Really high importance. Lives will be lost if you don't take this call.
Call 911 dumbass - leave me the fuck alone.
So, in all -- the simple solution is not to answer the stupid phone every time it rings. Unless you think you're going to get a treat or something.
There are features of the AmEx card (for the consumer, not for the vendor) that are value-adds that many people like.
Probably the biggest is that Visa/MC still don't provide detailed (and I mean REALLY detailed) reports and analysis of spending via the web or at the end of the year.
With AmEx, you can go online anytime and categorize spending by vendor type, etc.
Sorry, didn't realize he was a Libertarian.
Doesn't really matter... since a third party won't win this election.
Things aren't bad enough yet, and the people still believe the lies from R & D candidates.
Voting for the lesser of two evils is still better at this point in time. Maybe that will change someday, but not yet.
If you didn't have to rebuild the whole barbershop every couple of months for the guy to continue to have a workplace, RoR would be great.
So? What's so bad about that? It works.