although from an employee perspective it's not a positive thing, most companies put effort into preventing their employees from learning eachother's pay rates. I wonder how this senior coder determined what the new guy was getting? open his check?
I use my own computer simply because, pure and simple, it works and i am intimate with it
I'm that way also, I have my own computer (also a MBP) and a ton of gear in my bag. (I have to switch shoulders periodically when walking a distance, I don't pack light) And for the same reasons, that laptop is my main computer, there's not a big primary desktop at home, and I have my laptop set up the way I need it for optimal use.
Last job I worked, I was told they wanted me to have a "company machine" instead of using my own. He cited insurance reasons or something, was a bit vague, but I humored him. (CEO) Asked me to inventory what personal property I used at work. I told him I'd start with my laptop bag. it rang in at somewhere right around $4500 for the hardware and software. (as I said, I don't pack light, I buy quality gear, and I have good software) After emailing that to him, he never brought up the subject ever again.
Before that, way back in '99 or so, I had a powerbook g3 I took to work, and had a boss that flat out didn't want me bringing in my laptop. Back then I was a back room overnight data processor. When I walked in the building, I was carrying the fastest computer under the roof, with 4x more storage than the servers, many times the memory, the only usable scsi interface short of the servers themselves, the only firewire port in the building, the only machine that could burn CDs. (yes, in 1999, a laptop with a CD-R drive, god I loved that machine)
Anyway, I stopped bringing it in for about a week. Then we had a problem with one of the hard drives in the server. Couldn't work on it without downing the server since it had the only scsi interface. A day later the ISDN modem had issues and needed some adjustment and I had the only serial interface it liked. So he told me to bring my laptop back in. And never said a thing about it again.
Lets face it, sometimes an employee has a bit of personal hardware they use at work that makes their job easier, more effective, or sometimes just makes it possible. And some of that time, the company is unwilling or unable to replace it with company property. For me, a lot of it is simply convenience. I could have gotten by without my MBP, but I would have been a lot less effective, much slower to resolve many problems I ran into throughout the day as a support person, and generally would have been a lot less happy with my job. So that's why I didn't mind quite so much bringing in my own personal property. It makes my job more pleasant. And that's an OK tradeoff for me for the company to get the use of my computer rather than have to buy it for me. But so far nothing bad has come of it for me personally. Nobody's attempted to mess with my computer or demand access or monitoring or anything on it. If they tried, I'd just stop bringing it to work, and let the fallout rain down until they gave in or bought me something, as I did with the G3. Most companies are too cheap for that though and quickly give in.
At my current job, I always have my computer with me, and use it frequently. I tried using a company computer, but was far less effective with it, so they leave me alone.
I don't see why people are trying to figure out where to pidgeonhole this guy - he's a lunatic. You are looking for method to madness, and you're not likely to find anything conclusive.
Sorry, but if I saw this guy anywhere near me I would give him a seriously wide berth and try to be ready for anything. That face has "lets eat some babies" written all over it.
Ahh but then that little nagging issue of "Licensing" comes up. That's where you don't own it, you're paying to borrow it. And in that case they're allowed to dictate terms of use of their property.
But then all the consumers don't want software to be licensable, and all corporations do, and you know who wins that war.
usually their first recommendation is to put a watch on your credit score, a lot of the time when a bank has a breech they offer to pay for a year or so of this service to all their members whose information may have been exposed, so you can call them and see what they are offering for safeties after the fact.
Change your pin and password, security question, etc for this account immediately. If you have a pin or other password etc used on that account that you use in other places, you should change those other places also, as they may try to use the credentials on other accounts they can figure our are yours in other places.
Also while you're talking with this credit union, see what they can do to adjust the 'paranoia level' on your account. That's what gets you a phonecall from them when you go on a vacation and buy a bunch of stuff and suddenly the card is getting declined. You want high paranoia on their part for awhile. There may be ways to set reasonable hard limits on charges per day etc a bit like how you can usually only pull $250 cash a day from an ATM. Set those limits temporarily as tight as you feel you can. They may have other options, ask them.
And of course the ever-popular "consider changing banks". Do you really trust them as much with your money as you did before?
cheaper or not, taxpayers don't need to be paying for a DMV clerk's cell phone. There are a few that it makes sense for, people in upper management positions, emergency response chain members, or project leaders that need to be reached off-hours and on-site, etc, but that's a very small percentage of the crowd.
I don't think so.... When you can't trust your ISP and that the site you are connecting to is genuine, I don't think HTTPS works that well.
HTTPS sessions are verified by their SSL certificate, issued by a certificate authority. An ISP cannot tamper with traffic sent via HTTPS, and as long as its also encrypted (almost always) it can't read the traffic. (it CAN however see who you are talking with)
This here is a case of the ISP directing users to a different IP address (via faked DNS responses pointing to their spoofing server) and spoofing the login screen, and skimming the passwords. This would not be possible if the user was using HTTPS to connect to the server. Almost all HTTPS-capable web sites automatically forward HTTP requests to their HTTPS url immediately. Facebook does not. This places their users at risk.
Of course the auto forward itself is a weakness, if the user is used to using the non HTTPS url, they may type it in that way, in which case no HTTPS is ever started, and the skim can take place. Arguably the best thing for an HTTPS-capable site to do when someone tries an HTTP url is to pop up a page saying "type THIS instead" and do NOT offer an easy click-to-go-there. Make the user type it themselves. Make them get used to typing H-T-T-P-S. Make sure the only bookmarks they make that will ever work are HTTPS URLs. If you let the user be lazy, they'll get used to it and won't behave securely by default, and that can get them phished or skimmed. Too many users think that if the icon to the left of the url is a gold padlock they're secure, you need to train them to do things the right way, and not accept insecure initiations of traffic.
I wonder how that plays into kosher meat? iirc, among other things, the animal has to have no idea it's about to be killed for it to be considered kosher. (something about bad chemicals running through the animal's system if it's afraid for its life when slaughtered I think it was)
1) color-blind people don't see in black and white, they lack usually one of several photopigments and lack the ability to distinguish between a few colors that normal people can. red and green for example look the same to someone with RGCB. They can distinguish all the other colors, it's just that those two look identical.
2) sex linked has little to do with evolution in this case. you need one copy of the photopigment DNA to produce the pigment. Women have two X chromosomes. Sex-linked traits are traits expressed on the X chromosome. Men have only one copy, so if it's wrong, you lose out on something. The odds of a woman being shy on that allele on both of her X chromosomes is a lot smaller is all. Has nothing to do with the sex roles, that's just where that particular allele happens to be located. For example, a woman can have RGCB, but it's a lot rarer.
demonstration of how when the brain receives two different associated inputs and determines one is much more important than the other, how well it focuses you on just the important one.
In a predator-prey situation, prey are usually excellent at spotting movement. It's not surprising that when we see something start to move that's a bit dynamic, (like a tiger running through our view among the grass) how our brain "freezes" the image and allows us to process a more static interpretation of it while we track its movement through a visually very noisy environment.
Sort of along that line, after seeing that tiger race through the grass, you'd probably have completely missed the other three just standing there as the tiger you were tracking ran past them
I suppose the most glaring issue here is the double standard that software errors can be legally taken advantage of by the casinos, while they are illegal to take advantage of by the gambler. (or at least that looks like how the recent verdicts have been swinging)
Why do we need to upgrade and reboot the operating system to run, just, a new application?
Love it or hate it, Apple will drag its userbase, kicking and screaming if necessary, forward. In the end it's for the good of both Apple and their customers. If you want to live in the past, install windows xp;)
Apple supports their OS to, at most, one version back. Period. No exceptions, no extensions. But they also do their damndest to make the transitions as painless/smooth/transparent as possible. (classic,rosetta,etc) If you make it easy and orderly, and do it periodically, it's not a problem for the vast majority of users.
The best you can do is to give them a real challenge and reward them with a bigger challenge.
That is so true. Smart people get bored doing things they consider trivial. If you don't give them challenging work, not only are you wasting their talent, but you're going to either drive them away or get way substandard results.
To me the "cloud" of any value, basically ends up being network storage of some flavor.
This looks to have a significant portion of it as remote processing. Thinking more like the dumb terminals we used to have at the university.
This could really have its up-sides. After you've made the initial investment at your end, getting the keyboard,mouse,printer,display, then if you want to upgrade later you can just spend a little money on an upgrade to your service. No need to physically replace the machine, and cheaper to boot. No outdated computer going to the landfill. No need to even install software, just buy it and its instantly available, on ALL your machines. And your data also available at all your locations at once.
This is an interesting move, because in the past Apple has always been a hardware seller. They make a great OS but almost give it away, to sell their hardware. This isn't their first move into selling software for profit, (aperture, final cut, server, app store) so should be interesting to see how it pans out.
would be a video showing the ISS zip across the sun. (slowed down please! since the transit was less than one second) Good lord that man has good timing... (but I suspect he actually took a video of it and we're seeing a still - I mean who in their right mind would chance that with a single shudder click??)
new garmin nuvi. if you try to punch in directions for it to start navigating to, while the car's in motion, it won't let you. You have to go into the settings and disable the safety.
"That's right officer, I was distracted trying to disable my GPS's nav safety feature when I ran into that tree." Wonder how that would turn out for Garmin?
I think I'd call it more "security by bliss" (from 'ignorance is bliss") Really they're not so much taking advantage of users' ignorance, but rather that they don't care. As long as their computer is functional, most users don't care if their machine is participating in a botnet and DDoS'ing or spamming.
We keep hearing about how MS wants to move to cloud-based services, with things like office. If they're not taking this extremely seriously and providing five star response, it shoots their cloud image in the foot.
But then, they seem to like shooting themselves in the foot. (you'd think by now they'd have ran out of toes?) I certainly wouldn't trust them to keep my documents safe if they demonstrate they can't even handle my email.
it does sound like the judge is using your refusal to take the test as probable cause to issue a warrant.
Sounds like a 4th amendment issue. "We don't have probable cause, so we can't get a warrant. MAY we search your house?" "NO you may not." "OK then, your refusal to allow us to search gives us probable cause to believe you're hiding something illegal. Now that we have probable cause, here's the warrant. Step aside."
The 4th amendment is specifically worded to prevent that sort of abuse. (before this, in England, probable cause was "required", but refusal WAS probable cause in the law's eyes, so it didn't matter) I don't see why simply having a judge on site changes anything. Actually I don't see why they can even do that do you once they haul you off to jail for refusal. It probably comes back to your agreeing to the test as a condition for receiving your state-issued drivers' license?
if one dev could do all that in half a day, it'll take less skilled hackers a few days to develop the same thing, with them now knowing that it's not only possible, but easy to do.
I give it less than a week before we see a kit or three floating around on the various torrent sites.
What!? You can move a mouse as fast or as slowly as you like, you're only limited by your arm/wrist speed.
The faster you move a mouse, the less precise it becomes. Trackballs are also that way. I had to do quite a lot of searching to find a good trackball that had high tracking speed. Today's laser mice actually do pretty good but they cost a lot. You are still limited by physically having to swing around a mouse though. If you think about it you'll understand that there's a lot less inertia and travel distance in your right thumb moving a stick 3/4" than trying to whip a mouse halfway across your desk at anywhere near the same speed.
Also something I forgot to mention.... mice and analog sticks (as typically implemented) are fundamentally different kinds of input devices. Mice specify movement. Sticks specify position. This causes two differences that FPS experience:
1) lets say you are using the mouse to control your turn left / turn right. To stand in place and shoot at someone that's "circle straffing" you, you have to repeatedly pick up the mouse and move it back to the other side to resume spinning. With an analog stick set for movement, you just hold it a bit to the side to go in a smooth continuous uninterrupted spin. The same problem would occur if you were required to use the mouse to move forward. You'd constantly be picking up the mouse. In this application, sticks almost always have the advantage. Circle straffing some poor bastard with a mouse is almost unsporting. I remember doing that to the noobs trying to use a mouse as far back as marathon. "STOP DOING THAT DAMMIT!" hehe... good times.
2) to target someone at a distance with ironsights, with a mouse you move it as fast as you accurately can to about the location, then you slow down your hand movement and fine tune it before firing. How close you can get to the target before dropping into "fine tune" mode is the determining factor of how fast you can get off the first shot, and makes an unexpected "surprise melee in your face" a serious problem. With an analog stick and experience with the stick, you can get close to exact almost instantaneously, but getting fine tune can be difficult to impossible due to the limitation of the resolution of the stick. You may have to settle for "close" simply because the stick can't target the exact pixel you'd like to hit. So you can get close much faster than the mouse, but can't be as accurate. And that is why sticks beat mice close up and mice beat sticks at range.
time was back in the day when there were just basic controllers and joysticks, computers still tended to have the overall advantage because they had over 30 keys to bind to specific actions. Now with the average controller having 10 buttons on it in addition to dual analog sticks, that levels the playing field in that respect.
Slashdot Mirror
although from an employee perspective it's not a positive thing, most companies put effort into preventing their employees from learning eachother's pay rates. I wonder how this senior coder determined what the new guy was getting? open his check?
sub-state actors such as terrorists and individual hackers can't really do much damage.
Considering the presence of many brands of botnets for hire, I'd strongly disagree with that. Anyone with the cash can launch a cyber-attack.
Or look at what "Anonymous" has been doing lately. Or are they a state now?
I use my own computer simply because, pure and simple, it works and i am intimate with it
I'm that way also, I have my own computer (also a MBP) and a ton of gear in my bag. (I have to switch shoulders periodically when walking a distance, I don't pack light) And for the same reasons, that laptop is my main computer, there's not a big primary desktop at home, and I have my laptop set up the way I need it for optimal use.
Last job I worked, I was told they wanted me to have a "company machine" instead of using my own. He cited insurance reasons or something, was a bit vague, but I humored him. (CEO) Asked me to inventory what personal property I used at work. I told him I'd start with my laptop bag. it rang in at somewhere right around $4500 for the hardware and software. (as I said, I don't pack light, I buy quality gear, and I have good software) After emailing that to him, he never brought up the subject ever again.
Before that, way back in '99 or so, I had a powerbook g3 I took to work, and had a boss that flat out didn't want me bringing in my laptop. Back then I was a back room overnight data processor. When I walked in the building, I was carrying the fastest computer under the roof, with 4x more storage than the servers, many times the memory, the only usable scsi interface short of the servers themselves, the only firewire port in the building, the only machine that could burn CDs. (yes, in 1999, a laptop with a CD-R drive, god I loved that machine)
Anyway, I stopped bringing it in for about a week. Then we had a problem with one of the hard drives in the server. Couldn't work on it without downing the server since it had the only scsi interface. A day later the ISDN modem had issues and needed some adjustment and I had the only serial interface it liked. So he told me to bring my laptop back in. And never said a thing about it again.
Lets face it, sometimes an employee has a bit of personal hardware they use at work that makes their job easier, more effective, or sometimes just makes it possible. And some of that time, the company is unwilling or unable to replace it with company property. For me, a lot of it is simply convenience. I could have gotten by without my MBP, but I would have been a lot less effective, much slower to resolve many problems I ran into throughout the day as a support person, and generally would have been a lot less happy with my job. So that's why I didn't mind quite so much bringing in my own personal property. It makes my job more pleasant. And that's an OK tradeoff for me for the company to get the use of my computer rather than have to buy it for me. But so far nothing bad has come of it for me personally. Nobody's attempted to mess with my computer or demand access or monitoring or anything on it. If they tried, I'd just stop bringing it to work, and let the fallout rain down until they gave in or bought me something, as I did with the G3. Most companies are too cheap for that though and quickly give in.
At my current job, I always have my computer with me, and use it frequently. I tried using a company computer, but was far less effective with it, so they leave me alone.
I don't see why people are trying to figure out where to pidgeonhole this guy - he's a lunatic. You are looking for method to madness, and you're not likely to find anything conclusive.
Sorry, but if I saw this guy anywhere near me I would give him a seriously wide berth and try to be ready for anything. That face has "lets eat some babies" written all over it.
Ahh but then that little nagging issue of "Licensing" comes up. That's where you don't own it, you're paying to borrow it. And in that case they're allowed to dictate terms of use of their property.
But then all the consumers don't want software to be licensable, and all corporations do, and you know who wins that war.
usually their first recommendation is to put a watch on your credit score, a lot of the time when a bank has a breech they offer to pay for a year or so of this service to all their members whose information may have been exposed, so you can call them and see what they are offering for safeties after the fact.
Change your pin and password, security question, etc for this account immediately. If you have a pin or other password etc used on that account that you use in other places, you should change those other places also, as they may try to use the credentials on other accounts they can figure our are yours in other places.
Also while you're talking with this credit union, see what they can do to adjust the 'paranoia level' on your account. That's what gets you a phonecall from them when you go on a vacation and buy a bunch of stuff and suddenly the card is getting declined. You want high paranoia on their part for awhile. There may be ways to set reasonable hard limits on charges per day etc a bit like how you can usually only pull $250 cash a day from an ATM. Set those limits temporarily as tight as you feel you can. They may have other options, ask them.
And of course the ever-popular "consider changing banks". Do you really trust them as much with your money as you did before?
cheaper or not, taxpayers don't need to be paying for a DMV clerk's cell phone. There are a few that it makes sense for, people in upper management positions, emergency response chain members, or project leaders that need to be reached off-hours and on-site, etc, but that's a very small percentage of the crowd.
I don't think so. ...
When you can't trust your ISP and that the site you are connecting to is genuine, I don't think HTTPS works that well.
HTTPS sessions are verified by their SSL certificate, issued by a certificate authority. An ISP cannot tamper with traffic sent via HTTPS, and as long as its also encrypted (almost always) it can't read the traffic. (it CAN however see who you are talking with)
This here is a case of the ISP directing users to a different IP address (via faked DNS responses pointing to their spoofing server) and spoofing the login screen, and skimming the passwords. This would not be possible if the user was using HTTPS to connect to the server. Almost all HTTPS-capable web sites automatically forward HTTP requests to their HTTPS url immediately. Facebook does not. This places their users at risk.
Of course the auto forward itself is a weakness, if the user is used to using the non HTTPS url, they may type it in that way, in which case no HTTPS is ever started, and the skim can take place. Arguably the best thing for an HTTPS-capable site to do when someone tries an HTTP url is to pop up a page saying "type THIS instead" and do NOT offer an easy click-to-go-there. Make the user type it themselves. Make them get used to typing H-T-T-P-S. Make sure the only bookmarks they make that will ever work are HTTPS URLs. If you let the user be lazy, they'll get used to it and won't behave securely by default, and that can get them phished or skimmed. Too many users think that if the icon to the left of the url is a gold padlock they're secure, you need to train them to do things the right way, and not accept insecure initiations of traffic.
the vegan "meat tastes of fear!" line,
I wonder how that plays into kosher meat? iirc, among other things, the animal has to have no idea it's about to be killed for it to be considered kosher. (something about bad chemicals running through the animal's system if it's afraid for its life when slaughtered I think it was)
two things I'd like to point out,
1) color-blind people don't see in black and white, they lack usually one of several photopigments and lack the ability to distinguish between a few colors that normal people can. red and green for example look the same to someone with RGCB. They can distinguish all the other colors, it's just that those two look identical.
2) sex linked has little to do with evolution in this case. you need one copy of the photopigment DNA to produce the pigment. Women have two X chromosomes. Sex-linked traits are traits expressed on the X chromosome. Men have only one copy, so if it's wrong, you lose out on something. The odds of a woman being shy on that allele on both of her X chromosomes is a lot smaller is all. Has nothing to do with the sex roles, that's just where that particular allele happens to be located. For example, a woman can have RGCB, but it's a lot rarer.
demonstration of how when the brain receives two different associated inputs and determines one is much more important than the other, how well it focuses you on just the important one.
In a predator-prey situation, prey are usually excellent at spotting movement. It's not surprising that when we see something start to move that's a bit dynamic, (like a tiger running through our view among the grass) how our brain "freezes" the image and allows us to process a more static interpretation of it while we track its movement through a visually very noisy environment.
Sort of along that line, after seeing that tiger race through the grass, you'd probably have completely missed the other three just standing there as the tiger you were tracking ran past them
I suppose the most glaring issue here is the double standard that software errors can be legally taken advantage of by the casinos, while they are illegal to take advantage of by the gambler. (or at least that looks like how the recent verdicts have been swinging)
Why do we need to upgrade and reboot the operating system to run, just, a new application?
Love it or hate it, Apple will drag its userbase, kicking and screaming if necessary, forward. In the end it's for the good of both Apple and their customers. If you want to live in the past, install windows xp ;)
Apple supports their OS to, at most, one version back. Period. No exceptions, no extensions. But they also do their damndest to make the transitions as painless/smooth/transparent as possible. (classic,rosetta,etc) If you make it easy and orderly, and do it periodically, it's not a problem for the vast majority of users.
The best you can do is to give them a real challenge and reward them with a bigger challenge.
That is so true. Smart people get bored doing things they consider trivial. If you don't give them challenging work, not only are you wasting their talent, but you're going to either drive them away or get way substandard results.
To me the "cloud" of any value, basically ends up being network storage of some flavor.
This looks to have a significant portion of it as remote processing. Thinking more like the dumb terminals we used to have at the university.
This could really have its up-sides. After you've made the initial investment at your end, getting the keyboard,mouse,printer,display, then if you want to upgrade later you can just spend a little money on an upgrade to your service. No need to physically replace the machine, and cheaper to boot. No outdated computer going to the landfill. No need to even install software, just buy it and its instantly available, on ALL your machines. And your data also available at all your locations at once.
This is an interesting move, because in the past Apple has always been a hardware seller. They make a great OS but almost give it away, to sell their hardware. This isn't their first move into selling software for profit, (aperture, final cut, server, app store) so should be interesting to see how it pans out.
Occasionally, wolves will get in.
rotfl. that has to be one of the most entertaining analogies I've read in quite awhile.
would be a video showing the ISS zip across the sun. (slowed down please! since the transit was less than one second) Good lord that man has good timing... (but I suspect he actually took a video of it and we're seeing a still - I mean who in their right mind would chance that with a single shudder click??)
new garmin nuvi. if you try to punch in directions for it to start navigating to, while the car's in motion, it won't let you. You have to go into the settings and disable the safety.
"That's right officer, I was distracted trying to disable my GPS's nav safety feature when I ran into that tree." Wonder how that would turn out for Garmin?
For what your software costs, its performance is abysmal.
Last I checked, IE was free.
and horribly overpriced at that!
I think I'd call it more "security by bliss" (from 'ignorance is bliss") Really they're not so much taking advantage of users' ignorance, but rather that they don't care. As long as their computer is functional, most users don't care if their machine is participating in a botnet and DDoS'ing or spamming.
Sorry, but Apple really doesn't care.
That so explains why Apple is consistently in the top three (and frequently the top 1) for large company customer service...
We keep hearing about how MS wants to move to cloud-based services, with things like office. If they're not taking this extremely seriously and providing five star response, it shoots their cloud image in the foot.
But then, they seem to like shooting themselves in the foot. (you'd think by now they'd have ran out of toes?) I certainly wouldn't trust them to keep my documents safe if they demonstrate they can't even handle my email.
it does sound like the judge is using your refusal to take the test as probable cause to issue a warrant.
Sounds like a 4th amendment issue. "We don't have probable cause, so we can't get a warrant. MAY we search your house?" "NO you may not." "OK then, your refusal to allow us to search gives us probable cause to believe you're hiding something illegal. Now that we have probable cause, here's the warrant. Step aside."
The 4th amendment is specifically worded to prevent that sort of abuse. (before this, in England, probable cause was "required", but refusal WAS probable cause in the law's eyes, so it didn't matter) I don't see why simply having a judge on site changes anything. Actually I don't see why they can even do that do you once they haul you off to jail for refusal. It probably comes back to your agreeing to the test as a condition for receiving your state-issued drivers' license?
if one dev could do all that in half a day, it'll take less skilled hackers a few days to develop the same thing, with them now knowing that it's not only possible, but easy to do.
I give it less than a week before we see a kit or three floating around on the various torrent sites.
What!? You can move a mouse as fast or as slowly as you like, you're only limited by your arm/wrist speed.
The faster you move a mouse, the less precise it becomes. Trackballs are also that way. I had to do quite a lot of searching to find a good trackball that had high tracking speed. Today's laser mice actually do pretty good but they cost a lot. You are still limited by physically having to swing around a mouse though. If you think about it you'll understand that there's a lot less inertia and travel distance in your right thumb moving a stick 3/4" than trying to whip a mouse halfway across your desk at anywhere near the same speed.
Also something I forgot to mention.... mice and analog sticks (as typically implemented) are fundamentally different kinds of input devices. Mice specify movement. Sticks specify position. This causes two differences that FPS experience:
1) lets say you are using the mouse to control your turn left / turn right. To stand in place and shoot at someone that's "circle straffing" you, you have to repeatedly pick up the mouse and move it back to the other side to resume spinning. With an analog stick set for movement, you just hold it a bit to the side to go in a smooth continuous uninterrupted spin. The same problem would occur if you were required to use the mouse to move forward. You'd constantly be picking up the mouse. In this application, sticks almost always have the advantage. Circle straffing some poor bastard with a mouse is almost unsporting. I remember doing that to the noobs trying to use a mouse as far back as marathon. "STOP DOING THAT DAMMIT!" hehe... good times.
2) to target someone at a distance with ironsights, with a mouse you move it as fast as you accurately can to about the location, then you slow down your hand movement and fine tune it before firing. How close you can get to the target before dropping into "fine tune" mode is the determining factor of how fast you can get off the first shot, and makes an unexpected "surprise melee in your face" a serious problem. With an analog stick and experience with the stick, you can get close to exact almost instantaneously, but getting fine tune can be difficult to impossible due to the limitation of the resolution of the stick. You may have to settle for "close" simply because the stick can't target the exact pixel you'd like to hit. So you can get close much faster than the mouse, but can't be as accurate. And that is why sticks beat mice close up and mice beat sticks at range.
time was back in the day when there were just basic controllers and joysticks, computers still tended to have the overall advantage because they had over 30 keys to bind to specific actions. Now with the average controller having 10 buttons on it in addition to dual analog sticks, that levels the playing field in that respect.