The Circus Parade MP3 was a very savvy marketing move. Considering that most people in technology (the obvious target demographic) work at freakshows, it should come in quite handy.
A lot of posters comment that you should stay focused on your duties. Good advice, but sometimes easier said than done. Of late, I've been fighting a lot of turmult, including a transition to a less interesting project that is understaffed and has very poor direction from above. I find myself wasting large amounts of time (yes, posting on slashdot), having trouble focusing because I feel so overwhelmed.
To counteract it, instead of concentrating on the gargantuan tasks ahead, I try to force myself to simply work for 15 minutes at a time. If the task is interesting and I get in a good stride, I wind up building momentum and have a productive day. If I fail to get fired up, I take five minutes for a quick break and change my focus to another task or equal priority or go at the same task from a different angle (e.g. tackle this other routine instead of all those variables).
Obviously, it doesn't always work. Still, I find I'm not dreading status meetings as I used to because I can say I've actually done something.
While we find it amusing to see these guys tripped up by simple mistakes and paint them as inept (and, yes, I definately enjoy it), the truth isn't that simple. These guys might not be Einstein, they aren't idiots. Look at what they've been able to pull off: complex plots involving dozens of people, smuggling materials and personell over international borders, building finance networks. It's easy to harp on the mistakes of the operatives that screw up, but the fact is that these guys do a lot to avoid detection and exposure. They made one mistake that got them caught, but they do a lot of things in a competent (if ruthless) manner.
I'm sure that the investigators who uncovered this mistake by Al Queda spent a lot of time bashing their heads on their desks as they ran into dead ends. Like most police work, this "lucky break" probably only came to light after a lot of fruitless efforts. These investigators made their luck out of a lot of legwork and late nights.
We like to pretend that Al Queda is inept because it helps us sleep better at night. That fact is that in this case the good guys were simply better (and more persistent) at uncovering tracks than Al Queda was at concealing them.
In our day and age or in any era dealing with a legitimate civil servant, you have a good point.
In this case, though, most of these guys were brownshirts, street thugs with delusions of grandeur. When they had a chance to latch into a juicy civil service position in the middle of the Depression because of their political (Nazi) connections, they jumped at it. This was despite the fact (as the other poster pointed out) their very jobs would have called for plausible deniability by anyone with any sense.
Of course, it's real easy for us to criticize the Nazis or Al Queda as inept because they left paper trails. The fact is that they were not entirely stupid (just look at the horrible things they did manage to accomplish). They probably did a lot to cover their tracks, leaving a lot of investigators bashing their heads on their desks during the search. In the end, though, the good guys simply did a better job (and spent a lot more hours) uncovering the tracks than the perps did in hiding them.
I recall a TV movie years ago about the prosecution of Nazi war crimes, specifically about (*SPOILER ALERT*) the murders of Allied P.O.W.s by the Gestapo depicted in the movie "The Great Escape."
One of the big problems after the war was that a lot of SS/Gestapo officers destroyed their records in an effort to claim that they'd served with other units, had had lower ranks, or hadn't even served (a similar thing that is being seen with senior Baathists in Iraq today). In the end, the prosecutors wound up proving the service histories of their suspects by finding that all of them had filled out their government pension paperwork when they'd joined their units or received promotions.
Again, it was simple greed (or stinginess) that led to their downfall.
Actually, it would mean they'd park perhaps half a block away in the lot at said Denny's and then walk on over. Of course, if you have a GPS enabled phone (and your boss somehow has access), you'll need to take further precautions.
...you've never worked in the civil service before.
"The computer says what? Why, that must be wrong. We were just eating at that Denny's next door. I don't know, sir. If you can't prove it either way, I guess you'll just have to trust us."
There's another route, one that allows you to avoid supporting both the cartel and the (possibly unsavory) people at the source: recycle.
Years ago my mother inherited two diamond rings from my grandmother (her mother-in-law), neither of which was in a style she liked. Rather than letting the rings gather dust or selling them, she found a jeweler who reset both sets of diamonds into a setting she prefered (after recieving my father's blessing to avoid sentiment issues). The jeweler may or may not have melted down the gold for the new setting, too, but I'm not sure.
The end result: Grandma's dimonds (with all associated sentimental value) in Mom's ring. Eventually, I wound up using that ring when I proposed to my wife.
In this day and age of mall jewelry stores, it might be tough to find a place that actually makes the stuff (the guy my Mom used was a retired jeweler we knew with decades of experience who was literally working out of his garage as a hobby). If you find a place you trust (i.e. has all the proper references, etc), though, there are catalogs with blank settings that you can use to insert the stones you already own and perhaps add a few more for color (emerald, saphire, etc.). That is what my wife and I did with her wedding ring.
Realistically, you won't save that much money with the labor costs will offset a lot of the value of the recycled stones. You will wind up with an absolutely unique piece for your beloved, one that may have extra sentimental value because of the origin of the stones.
Isn't the rough defintion of SPAM "Anything I don't want in my mailbox"? If that's the case, isn't the human score going to be 100% (at least for the intended recipient)?
If you open your answer with this phrase and also indicate that you have good references from your leads/managers, you won't need to go into greater detail unless asked. This allows you to accentuate the positive and also lets you lead into your stronger qualifications:
"The gap's there because the company had bad luck and the contract disappeared. I can give you references from my ex-boss telling you more about it. He was also the guy managing me when I came up with improvement ABC that saved the company XYZ dollars. Let me tell you more about how we tested it..."
The delightful "A Walking Tour of The Shambles" details a (presumably) fictional region of Chicago filled with amusing/disturbing/terrifying sights and characters inspired by Charles Addams and Edward Gorey. In it, there is a description of Number Eight, Old Street, which...
"...houses an interesting store in which this guidebook and many other useful and curious items may be obtained. (Notice that this book is in the shop, which itself is in the book -- an infinite progression)."
A lot of people have commented about how sad it is to play a game that simulates people playing a game. I kind of found the reverse: I stopped playing "The Sims" when I realized my Sims had more social interaction, time spent putdoors, and generally nicer lives than I did.
I always considered it a wake up call, but in retrospect maybe it was just jealousy.
You just made a serious mistake by not posting anonymously when you identified your skillset, my friend. If your friends are anything like mine, I can just imagine what's filling your inbox right now:
You, know, I wasn't thinking of bidding on it until I saw your post. But I thought about it and maybe we can do the usual tech support thing. You know: you swing by and help me put it together. I'll provide the pizza and beer.
If the Grammys have a five minute delay, then the Nebulas will have seven and a half. After all, that's the only way to guard against Eccentrica Gallumbits, the triple-breasted whore of Eroticon 6.
I'm writing this in Modzilla, but my family members still use IE. The problem is, of course, that I'm stuck as the tech support guy if they get infected.
Thanks for the link. The comment "Internet Explorer handles certain files based on its content rather than the extension" shows just how out of touch my Windows knowledge is - I thought it was extensions exclusively. Also, the fact that IE does this puts a lot more concerns about just viewing web pages into my nightmares.
In the first part of the article, the author talks to the author of "Batch Trojan Generator" and creates an infected JPEG file, one that "would quietly reach into the victim's Microsoft Windows operating system and insert new commands telling the computer to erase its own hard drive" when clicked.
To me, this implies that the JPEG is actually executable code. On the face of it, this is patently ridiculous. I started thinking about it, though, and relaized that the actual mechanism might simply be an exploit of a buffer overflow in the code that interprets the JPEG (not the JPEG itself, which is not executing). By having the JPEG reference something outside of the boudaries of the actual JPEG file, it might go out and stick malicious machine code in some piece of RAM where it later gets executed.
Am I correct in this assumption about JPEG trojans, or does (unpatched) Windows go out and somehow execute a file ending in.JPG as if it were ending in.EXE? For that matter, if one embedded the JPG in an HTML mail message (or just stuck it on a web page) instead of attaching it, would it execute in the same manner and infect or is there a different JPEG engine at work (i.e. the one in IE or Outlook isn't vulnerable but the one in Microsoft Photo Editor, assigned by default to file type.JPG, is)?
Slashdot Mirror
The Circus Parade MP3 was a very savvy marketing move. Considering that most people in technology (the obvious target demographic) work at freakshows, it should come in quite handy.
To counteract it, instead of concentrating on the gargantuan tasks ahead, I try to force myself to simply work for 15 minutes at a time. If the task is interesting and I get in a good stride, I wind up building momentum and have a productive day. If I fail to get fired up, I take five minutes for a quick break and change my focus to another task or equal priority or go at the same task from a different angle (e.g. tackle this other routine instead of all those variables).
Obviously, it doesn't always work. Still, I find I'm not dreading status meetings as I used to because I can say I've actually done something.
but for now you better get in line.
I've had a few in my day,
but the hall of fame is still far away.
Congrats! Be sure to show off the addition to the bottom of your user page to all your buddies.
I'm sure that the investigators who uncovered this mistake by Al Queda spent a lot of time bashing their heads on their desks as they ran into dead ends. Like most police work, this "lucky break" probably only came to light after a lot of fruitless efforts. These investigators made their luck out of a lot of legwork and late nights.
We like to pretend that Al Queda is inept because it helps us sleep better at night. That fact is that in this case the good guys were simply better (and more persistent) at uncovering tracks than Al Queda was at concealing them.
Of course, it's real easy for us to criticize the Nazis or Al Queda as inept because they left paper trails. The fact is that they were not entirely stupid (just look at the horrible things they did manage to accomplish). They probably did a lot to cover their tracks, leaving a lot of investigators bashing their heads on their desks during the search. In the end, though, the good guys simply did a better job (and spent a lot more hours) uncovering the tracks than the perps did in hiding them.
One of the big problems after the war was that a lot of SS/Gestapo officers destroyed their records in an effort to claim that they'd served with other units, had had lower ranks, or hadn't even served (a similar thing that is being seen with senior Baathists in Iraq today). In the end, the prosecutors wound up proving the service histories of their suspects by finding that all of them had filled out their government pension paperwork when they'd joined their units or received promotions.
Again, it was simple greed (or stinginess) that led to their downfall.
Rockstar/Id merger and Quake jokes in 3, 2, 1...
Actually, it would mean they'd park perhaps half a block away in the lot at said Denny's and then walk on over. Of course, if you have a GPS enabled phone (and your boss somehow has access), you'll need to take further precautions.
I have no idea what this would be, but I am sure I'll be having nightmares about it for the next week or so.
"The computer says what? Why, that must be wrong. We were just eating at that Denny's next door. I don't know, sir. If you can't prove it either way, I guess you'll just have to trust us."
Call Dibold! I think I just figured out a way to make electronic voting work!
There's another route, one that allows you to avoid supporting both the cartel and the (possibly unsavory) people at the source: recycle.
Years ago my mother inherited two diamond rings from my grandmother (her mother-in-law), neither of which was in a style she liked. Rather than letting the rings gather dust or selling them, she found a jeweler who reset both sets of diamonds into a setting she prefered (after recieving my father's blessing to avoid sentiment issues). The jeweler may or may not have melted down the gold for the new setting, too, but I'm not sure. The end result: Grandma's dimonds (with all associated sentimental value) in Mom's ring. Eventually, I wound up using that ring when I proposed to my wife.
In this day and age of mall jewelry stores, it might be tough to find a place that actually makes the stuff (the guy my Mom used was a retired jeweler we knew with decades of experience who was literally working out of his garage as a hobby). If you find a place you trust (i.e. has all the proper references, etc), though, there are catalogs with blank settings that you can use to insert the stones you already own and perhaps add a few more for color (emerald, saphire, etc.). That is what my wife and I did with her wedding ring.
Realistically, you won't save that much money with the labor costs will offset a lot of the value of the recycled stones. You will wind up with an absolutely unique piece for your beloved, one that may have extra sentimental value because of the origin of the stones.
The heck with Anheuser-Busch, I'm more concerned about my friends finding out!
But drinking Bud always makes me that way.
Isn't the rough defintion of SPAM "Anything I don't want in my mailbox"? If that's the case, isn't the human score going to be 100% (at least for the intended recipient)?
So the two together would be as much fun as HOL?
<ducks>
If you open your answer with this phrase and also indicate that you have good references from your leads/managers, you won't need to go into greater detail unless asked. This allows you to accentuate the positive and also lets you lead into your stronger qualifications:
"The gap's there because the company had bad luck and the contract disappeared. I can give you references from my ex-boss telling you more about it. He was also the guy managing me when I came up with improvement ABC that saved the company XYZ dollars. Let me tell you more about how we tested it..."
"...houses an interesting store in which this guidebook and many other useful and curious items may be obtained. (Notice that this book is in the shop, which itself is in the book -- an infinite progression)."
I always considered it a wake up call, but in retrospect maybe it was just jealousy.
Lemme just say that the guvmt'll get my surplus Soviet military jet fighter when you pry the joystick from my cold, dead fingers!
You, know, I wasn't thinking of bidding on it until I saw your post. But I thought about it and maybe we can do the usual tech support thing. You know: you swing by and help me put it together. I'll provide the pizza and beer.
So, are you busy next weekend or not?
If the Grammys have a five minute delay, then the Nebulas will have seven and a half. After all, that's the only way to guard against Eccentrica Gallumbits, the triple-breasted whore of Eroticon 6.
Shudder...
Thanks again.
In the first part of the article, the author talks to the author of "Batch Trojan Generator" and creates an infected JPEG file, one that "would quietly reach into the victim's Microsoft Windows operating system and insert new commands telling the computer to erase its own hard drive" when clicked.
To me, this implies that the JPEG is actually executable code. On the face of it, this is patently ridiculous. I started thinking about it, though, and relaized that the actual mechanism might simply be an exploit of a buffer overflow in the code that interprets the JPEG (not the JPEG itself, which is not executing). By having the JPEG reference something outside of the boudaries of the actual JPEG file, it might go out and stick malicious machine code in some piece of RAM where it later gets executed.
Am I correct in this assumption about JPEG trojans, or does (unpatched) Windows go out and somehow execute a file ending in .JPG as if it were ending in .EXE? For that matter, if one embedded the JPG in an HTML mail message (or just stuck it on a web page) instead of attaching it, would it execute in the same manner and infect or is there a different JPEG engine at work (i.e. the one in IE or Outlook isn't vulnerable but the one in Microsoft Photo Editor, assigned by default to file type .JPG, is)?
Thanks in advance...