It's a nice thought, but... well, the argument will go something like:
IT: Here's Linux, it costs no license fee, and is more supportable, so everything's better and faster.
Customer: What about app XYZ that Fred over there bodged together in Lotus-1-2-3 12 years ago, and is a vital part of our payroll*
IT: Hmm....
If you're really lucky, you'll have an IT department that's 'strong' and can declare what's supported and what's not. At which point you _can_ start to look at the things that'll work. You'll probably do OK too. However, then you'll face a 'product evaluation' as you try and convince The Business that it's a good step - after all, Windows is the devil they know. These things cost money, and time, and I'm pretty sure Microsoft are sufficiently intelligent that they'll avoid that.
Sounds stupid, I know, but... business users are conservative. Loss of 'time' is very expensive. You'll have to convince them the advantage, and it'll be hard.
* Yes, actually there was a finance app that was a Lotus-1-2-3 macro, that stalled us upgrading to Windows NT -> 2000 -> WinXP, simply because it was both payroll critical, and no one would pay for the development time to port it.
Theft requires removal of someone elses property. Theft of services I believe includes 'impact on the service' - if you download a file from someone elses server, then you've 'stolen' the bandwithd/CPU time. However you haven't 'stolen' the file - they still have it.
If the other person doesn't lose _anything_ it isn't theft. Loss of revenue due to copyright infringement isn't theft either - you've not taken away anything, just not made a purchase you might have otherwise done.
What if it does? Wouldn't be the first time the human race has made a huge mistake, and almost certainly won't be the last
Generally though, if you follow the Ten Commandments through your life, I don't think many would say you're making a mistake. OK, the atheists might argue that the bits about honouring God and idolatry are foolishness, but I don't think many would assert that you're harming society by doing so.
Pretty much, yes. Tao doesn't specifically exclude God, it's just... the underlying structure if you will. *shrug* you may or may not agree, but personally I feel it's worth a look. Something like "Tao, The Watercourse Way" by Alan Watts is a good book if you're interested.
How much effort was there in you doing the 'switch' though. Windows usually comes with your PC, and if it isn't mostly just installs. Don't get me wrong, I really like Linux, but I have to say my dad went back to Win98 (yes, I know) because the Linux he tried to install did a couple of 'bomb out' crashes, and he got frustrated by it being obscure in what was up.
It's all well and good to get a running copy of Linux for someone, but that cuts out 90% (or more) who either get it pre-installed, or want to install it themselves to see what it's like.
The place where Linux really needs to start to shine is the workplace. People run PCs at home, mostly because they run PCs at work. There's exceptions, but this is definitely the majority.
What's really needed is some 'professional' IT organisation to sell a definitive Linux solution for a whole workplace. And support it. And point out that actually it a) costs less to support and b) is way cheaper.
Personally, I think it's viable, and I can see IBM gradually moving that way, and perhaps Sun too. But they'll have a lot of work to do to overcome the 'No one ever got fired for buying Microsoft' attitude that's ingrained into most of the workplaces in the world. (I'm still somewhat stunned at the complete lack of understanding of the mere existance of Unix that I see in my current, IT company).
*shrug* I look forward to a day when every business desktop runs Linux. I think there's a lot of people who's talents are wasted being support monkeys for cranky windows bogosity. But at the same time, I can't see it happening, simply because it'll put a lot of people out of work.
Ah, but what if the social moral codes were done by the priest, who, in general, were a bit wiser than average, and had a bit of control of what became 'doctrine'? So they come up with a bunch of stuff they think's a good way to live (not eating pork, for example, is probably pretty good health advice if you live in the areas where Islam flourished). Anyone who starts bringing in the... less positive stuff, gets denounced by these guys as a heretic. I mean it's taking the basic uneducated peasant, and saying 'do this, because God says, and all these guys in the church agree'. As a form of directing the populace, it's pretty hard to disagree with.
I'm less sure. I mean, hypothetically, if someone 2000 years back realised that he had a pretty simple idea, to make the world a better place.
He came up with some rules, and said "Live like this, and life will be good"
When asked why, said "Because God says so."
Now, just hypothetically, would his doing so have been any less influential if he didn't believe in the God he claimed?
It's hard to say whether the world is a better place or not, but... well frankly I think a lot of the 'basics' of religion are fairly positive ways to live. Regardless of whether you believe or not, following the 'rules' for being a Christian (or other religion, I use Christanity because I know it a littel better) is probably generally beneficial for society as a whole.
Decision about religion (or not) is a matter of personal choice. However, you're wise to not just assume you should be xyz just because someone told you it was the true way. Personally, I've rather enjoyed reading about Taoism fairly recently, and think that's one that appeals. Conceptually, there is the Tao (or Dao, or Way, or a whole other possible variants that comes of chinese translation). It's pretty hard to explain (it's fundamentaly indescribable) but about the nearest analogy that most of 'us westerners' might get is the Force. Sort of life energy, linking everything. But that's also a bit of a... corruption of the original meaning, it just shares some of the basics.
At the end of the day, your life will not be negatively effected by reading all the 'key' religous texts out there. You may not agree with what they say, but that's not to say you can't appreciate that there may be something to think about there, and will definitely give a better understanding of the human condition.
Who was the bible written by though? I mean, there's few today who'd claim to 'understand God', and there's plenty of theologians studying 'His Message'.
I've always assumed the Bible to be much like current theological studies. Whether you think it's divinely inspired or not, you still have some stuff, written by men, with some profound thoughts and metaphors in them.
If you don't believe, well ok. But that doesn't mean you shouldn't think about reading a 2000 year old book on philosophy. That'd be like saying you should read Harry Potter because you don't think wizards are real.
I believe there's some old quote, that I can't be bothered to find, that goes something like "Utopia would be very boring".
The concept that good and evil are mutually linked is a recurrent theme, particularly in Taoism.
In essence, if we had no 'light' it would be much the same as if we had no cabbages falling from the sky. We'd have no word, nor concept for the state, because one without the other is meaningless.
There's no point differentiating something that there's no 'alternative state'. So if everyone was good (or Good) then it would be meaningless. Not non-existant, because it's probably entirely possible that you'd have a group of people who were just fundamentally nice to everyone (although it's arguable about how much you have to balance 'good' with 'necessary' e.g. do you kill plants to eat them, or hunt deer because you're hungry).
The other thing that's very Taoist is being unable to explain. "The Tao that can be spoken (of) is not the Tao". I've always picked up on a very simple 'thing'. Namely that the universe itself moves in harmony. It's a complex machine, with emergent behaviour in it. What better name than 'God' for something so complex and unfathomable, and yet ultimately so intimately linked with our own existance.
But by the same token, it's hard to explain why and how these things mesh and flow together. We cannot put into words this thing that we cannot truly comprehend.
The bible had a load of parables, explicitly described as such. May or may not have been true, but their value was in the metaphor they conveyed.
You can apply the same general principle to the Bible (or to be fair, pretty much all the holy books out there). You can summarise various bits of wisdom in them as 'don't be a dick, and the world will be a better place'.
Personally, I'd rather that more people took aboard that particular message.
A lot more enterprises are still considering their roll out of XP. It doesn't give a huge amount more functionality, the license costs suck, and the rollout of _any_ new OS across a large number of users is painful.
I can see a similar discussion being had about Vista. Home use, they're plugging on... well, the only reason I'm considering it is my favourite game is going DirectX 10. But the cost of a new license if you _don't_ pay microsoft tax is pretty outrageous, so I might just not bother.
However for the 'average corp' the upgrade drive is just ego as suits want the 'newest thingy'.
Thanks to recent developments, linux is just about becoming a viable alternative, as being 'end user friendly'. *shrug* Too many companies are blinkered to the alternatives, but might notice a cost comparison of e.g. 30k users running a well supported linux, vs. 30k users running Vista.
In general, copyright violation is _not_ theft. At least, not under UK law:
The Theft Act 1968 Section1 (1) states that a person is guilty of theft if: he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it.
There are laws against violation of intellectual property rights, but calling it 'theft' is inaccurate.
Re:slightly off-topic - general post on AI
on
Marvin Minsky On AI
·
· Score: 1
You're entirely correct. There's some amazingly cool stuff we can do theses days, but the reality is not a lot has changed since the early days of machine code. We're just doing the same things, programatically, just with better tools.
The thing that differentiates 'AI' from 'neato coding' is the ability to 'think autonomously'. In order to implement that, we'd have to understand it first.
There's a lot of milage in 'behavioural logics' and 'success and fail' criteria, but... well how many people can actively define all the very small decisions they make, in terms of 'why'?
We can't do artificial intelligence until we actually understand intelligence. Otherwise all we're doing is biology emulation.
When I left university, I shifted to 'Unix Systems Admin' for a small company (10, that grew to 30). It folded in a year, and then I moved on to 150,000 person company, again, going in at 'Sysadmin', and completely bypassing 'support monkey'.
I know _first hand_ that some of my compatriots who _didn't_ finish their degree have done a lot worse. One or two are gradually 'muscling in' on IT, but are doing so the hard way. I've been doing the kind of thing they're aiming at for 5 years.
Some of that was getting work experience whilst at Uni, but I really don't think the door to my second job would have been open without a degree. (I stayed there 6 years before moving on)
Indeed, but I know I've suggested 'junior SA candidates' from the staff pool of brighter and more enthusiastic helldesk operatives.
Learning more is no bad thing - the only 'stupid' question is the one you don't ask. But at the same time, the trap is to 'know more' than someone who's done it for a while. Even if you do, there's very few people who appreciate being told, especially by someone who's not got the experience to back it up.
We do culturally pay more attention to 'academia'. That is, after all, kind of the point - someone who's life work is a particular field, has a quite good basis to assert expertise.
I don't care about pseudonyms, nor what bits of paper you do or don't hold. I will continue to give someone who has a doctorate in medicine, more credence than a co-worker, at least when it come to 'what to do about my back pain'.
I do however, object to someone lying about having the aforementioned bits of paper.
*shrug* I consider having gone to University a very valuable part of my life. Both because of the skills gained in the process, and the social development from having done so. I won't say it's _vital_ but... well it's benefitted me more than any other thing I've done since I became 'working age' about 10 years ago.
My only real regret was that I didn't quite 'get it' at that point, so didn't work as hard at it as I should have done.
Certificates are a very good way for companies to advertise their products, and get 'techies' on board with doing them. If you've got a Cisco cert, and someone asks you about network tech, then you're likely to be biased towards cisco. (If only because cisco cert + cisco tech makes you more valuable as an employee).
But they're definitely 'vendor lead'. Some day, there might be a 'real' 'system admin' cert, but... well, Chartered Engineer takes a whole lot of effort to accomplish, where 'certs' are generally short and sweet.
Not that they're a bad idea if you can convince an employer to get you through 'em:)
I mean.. what is an IT career if it doesn't involve coding? I literally can't think of anything..
I could start a list, but I'll leave it at - I work for an IT organisation, and whilst i've got some good perl-fu, most of them do not. You don't need to 'code' to do most systems admin style troubleshooting, and most of the 'management apps' abstract any need to be able to code.
That's not to say I haven't found 'programming skills' useful, I have, but they're a part of a repetoire and aren't actually all that critical. But then, so's a whole host of other skills, like being able to drive, speak a second language, project management, formal document writing and an understanding of accounting and finance.
I'd go as far as saying you'll have an easier time introducing an 'average man off the shop floor' to IT, than you would getting an IT guru 'attuned' to how this particular company works, operates and what their needs are.
I'm afraid I'd largely agree. Certifications don't carry a huge amount of weight in a lot of places. They might help get an interview, if you've gone one that matches the _specific_ skill set they're looking for, but all too often in systems admin, you are looking for a 'best fit'.
It's very rare to find someone with the precise combination of vendor specific certifications, and it's actually much more useful to find someone with experience in the 'relevant area' e.g. 'has done firewalls' rather than 'has got Checkpoint Firewall-1 V. 4.2.6 cert'. The former will often make the latter easy, rather than the other way around, and is more likely to find a 'good fit' than trying to match up the certs. From experience, certifications are skewed by marketing anyway:).
It is well worth your time to get together the parts to 'do the basics' of what you're trying to achieve. Run a webserver at home, build a home network, and then consider how you'd go about doing so on a larger scale - pretend you've got 200 users, who want a 24/7 service, and think about how you'd accomplish it. You'll probably find that kind of system is just too expensive for a home project, however that doesn't mean you can't try and get your head around the technologies involved.
Oh, and as a final note, Microsoft is very prevalent. You'll never get away from _some_ interaction with it. However it will do you _very_ well if you look to gain hands on (home experience) on a Unix. I've got a homogenous environment running Windows at work, and still have a couple of Linux boxes to do 'real work' on - for the end user, they don't care as long as their word docs are fine, however when it comes to network analysis, scripting, webserving or a whole host of ancillary stuff that helps 'doing sysadmin' then Linux (and Cygwin) are invaluable tools.
System's admin is a big subject, as I'm sure you're quite well aware.
However, it's pretty much always a support service. Therefore you should expect that you'll end up on call. Personally I don't like that part, but can't deny the extra pay is nice.
It's also a field where experience is what really really matters. Which means it can be tough to break into. Certifications and degrees are nice, but it's my '5 years in the industry' which opens doors, not the other bits of paper.
However as a starting point in 'building your career', I will suggest you look at:
ITIL - IT infrastructure library. It's something that put me off initally, as it look a bit too much like icky-yuck processes and procedures. However, I've run into a _lot_ of companies that are starting to 'buy in' to the model. That wouldn't convince me, though. What did, is it's actually a fairly good way of 'doing IT'. Not the only way by any means, but one worth looking at, if only because then you have a basis for comparison.
SAGE Systems Administrators guild, a subdivision of Usenix.
Don't neglect the 'soft' skills though. I know many hardcore techies hate the idea, but the ability to wear a suit, and look good and confident when doing so is _very_ useful. Also 'social interaction' skills. Systems admin is as much about the people (ab)using the system as the system itself.
As far as I can tell, your bits of paper serve to help you secure an interview. But the field's.... well sufficiently complicated and convoluted that your ability to learn, research and innovate are far more important. As is your ability to show you can do this.
It's simpler than that. As long as this content is intended to be readable, it will be read.
As long as I can point a camera at my TV, or a microphone next to my speakers, copy protection is just not going to work.
OK, so you have to play around a bit to get a high quality copy, (like syncing with the TV refresh, or making sure that 'noise' is minimised) but fundamentally, you're reproducing what the eye and ear are doing - picking up the 'transmission' from your TV or speakers, but storing it electronically rather than biologically.
This is why DRM, DMCA etc. cannot succeed. The media companies are already obselete, they just don't know it yet. You cannot treat 'information' that can be trivially replicated as a physical object, and expect that to work.
Well, given that the entirety of the program code is made up of bytes, and these are commonly used all over the place, then it's pretty hard to stop you.
However, in a general sense, from what we've seen so far, if the associated thugs 'think you are' then that's probably enough for them to come and stamp on your choc-ice.
So far, I think I've seen several sources for DeCSS code, from a prime number that happens to unpack in gzip, to a sequence of hexidecimal DNS records.
This is fundamentally why the 'DMCA' style laws are asnine and futile - you're being sold a box. And the key to the box. And then told that you're not allowed to open the box, that you bought, except how and when the person who sold it to you says.
I have no problems with copyright law, but trying to treat digital media as physical items is just doomed to failure.
Slashdot Mirror
IT: Here's Linux, it costs no license fee, and is more supportable, so everything's better and faster.
Customer: What about app XYZ that Fred over there bodged together in Lotus-1-2-3 12 years ago, and is a vital part of our payroll*
IT: Hmm....
If you're really lucky, you'll have an IT department that's 'strong' and can declare what's supported and what's not. At which point you _can_ start to look at the things that'll work. You'll probably do OK too. However, then you'll face a 'product evaluation' as you try and convince The Business that it's a good step - after all, Windows is the devil they know. These things cost money, and time, and I'm pretty sure Microsoft are sufficiently intelligent that they'll avoid that.
Sounds stupid, I know, but ... business users are conservative. Loss of 'time' is very expensive. You'll have to convince them the advantage, and it'll be hard.
* Yes, actually there was a finance app that was a Lotus-1-2-3 macro, that stalled us upgrading to Windows NT -> 2000 -> WinXP, simply because it was both payroll critical, and no one would pay for the development time to port it.
If the other person doesn't lose _anything_ it isn't theft. Loss of revenue due to copyright infringement isn't theft either - you've not taken away anything, just not made a purchase you might have otherwise done.
Generally though, if you follow the Ten Commandments through your life, I don't think many would say you're making a mistake. OK, the atheists might argue that the bits about honouring God and idolatry are foolishness, but I don't think many would assert that you're harming society by doing so.
http://www.amazon.com/Tao-Watercourse-Way-Alan-Wat ts/dp/0394733118
It's all well and good to get a running copy of Linux for someone, but that cuts out 90% (or more) who either get it pre-installed, or want to install it themselves to see what it's like.
What's really needed is some 'professional' IT organisation to sell a definitive Linux solution for a whole workplace. And support it. And point out that actually it a) costs less to support and b) is way cheaper.
Personally, I think it's viable, and I can see IBM gradually moving that way, and perhaps Sun too. But they'll have a lot of work to do to overcome the 'No one ever got fired for buying Microsoft' attitude that's ingrained into most of the workplaces in the world. (I'm still somewhat stunned at the complete lack of understanding of the mere existance of Unix that I see in my current, IT company).
*shrug* I look forward to a day when every business desktop runs Linux. I think there's a lot of people who's talents are wasted being support monkeys for cranky windows bogosity. But at the same time, I can't see it happening, simply because it'll put a lot of people out of work.
Ah, but what if the social moral codes were done by the priest, who, in general, were a bit wiser than average, and had a bit of control of what became 'doctrine'? So they come up with a bunch of stuff they think's a good way to live (not eating pork, for example, is probably pretty good health advice if you live in the areas where Islam flourished). Anyone who starts bringing in the ... less positive stuff, gets denounced by these guys as a heretic. I mean it's taking the basic uneducated peasant, and saying 'do this, because God says, and all these guys in the church agree'. As a form of directing the populace, it's pretty hard to disagree with.
He came up with some rules, and said "Live like this, and life will be good"
When asked why, said "Because God says so."
Now, just hypothetically, would his doing so have been any less influential if he didn't believe in the God he claimed?
It's hard to say whether the world is a better place or not, but... well frankly I think a lot of the 'basics' of religion are fairly positive ways to live. Regardless of whether you believe or not, following the 'rules' for being a Christian (or other religion, I use Christanity because I know it a littel better) is probably generally beneficial for society as a whole.
At the end of the day, your life will not be negatively effected by reading all the 'key' religous texts out there. You may not agree with what they say, but that's not to say you can't appreciate that there may be something to think about there, and will definitely give a better understanding of the human condition.
I've always assumed the Bible to be much like current theological studies. Whether you think it's divinely inspired or not, you still have some stuff, written by men, with some profound thoughts and metaphors in them.
If you don't believe, well ok. But that doesn't mean you shouldn't think about reading a 2000 year old book on philosophy. That'd be like saying you should read Harry Potter because you don't think wizards are real.
The concept that good and evil are mutually linked is a recurrent theme, particularly in Taoism.
In essence, if we had no 'light' it would be much the same as if we had no cabbages falling from the sky. We'd have no word, nor concept for the state, because one without the other is meaningless.
There's no point differentiating something that there's no 'alternative state'. So if everyone was good (or Good) then it would be meaningless. Not non-existant, because it's probably entirely possible that you'd have a group of people who were just fundamentally nice to everyone (although it's arguable about how much you have to balance 'good' with 'necessary' e.g. do you kill plants to eat them, or hunt deer because you're hungry).
The other thing that's very Taoist is being unable to explain. "The Tao that can be spoken (of) is not the Tao". I've always picked up on a very simple 'thing'. Namely that the universe itself moves in harmony. It's a complex machine, with emergent behaviour in it. What better name than 'God' for something so complex and unfathomable, and yet ultimately so intimately linked with our own existance.
But by the same token, it's hard to explain why and how these things mesh and flow together. We cannot put into words this thing that we cannot truly comprehend.
You can apply the same general principle to the Bible (or to be fair, pretty much all the holy books out there). You can summarise various bits of wisdom in them as 'don't be a dick, and the world will be a better place'.
Personally, I'd rather that more people took aboard that particular message.
I can see a similar discussion being had about Vista. Home use, they're plugging on ... well, the only reason I'm considering it is my favourite game is going DirectX 10. But the cost of a new license if you _don't_ pay microsoft tax is pretty outrageous, so I might just not bother.
However for the 'average corp' the upgrade drive is just ego as suits want the 'newest thingy'.
Thanks to recent developments, linux is just about becoming a viable alternative, as being 'end user friendly'. *shrug* Too many companies are blinkered to the alternatives, but might notice a cost comparison of e.g. 30k users running a well supported linux, vs. 30k users running Vista.
There are laws against violation of intellectual property rights, but calling it 'theft' is inaccurate.
The thing that differentiates 'AI' from 'neato coding' is the ability to 'think autonomously'. In order to implement that, we'd have to understand it first.
There's a lot of milage in 'behavioural logics' and 'success and fail' criteria, but ... well how many people can actively define all the very small decisions they make, in terms of 'why'?
We can't do artificial intelligence until we actually understand intelligence. Otherwise all we're doing is biology emulation.
I know _first hand_ that some of my compatriots who _didn't_ finish their degree have done a lot worse. One or two are gradually 'muscling in' on IT, but are doing so the hard way. I've been doing the kind of thing they're aiming at for 5 years.
Some of that was getting work experience whilst at Uni, but I really don't think the door to my second job would have been open without a degree. (I stayed there 6 years before moving on)
Learning more is no bad thing - the only 'stupid' question is the one you don't ask. But at the same time, the trap is to 'know more' than someone who's done it for a while. Even if you do, there's very few people who appreciate being told, especially by someone who's not got the experience to back it up.
I don't care about pseudonyms, nor what bits of paper you do or don't hold. I will continue to give someone who has a doctorate in medicine, more credence than a co-worker, at least when it come to 'what to do about my back pain'.
I do however, object to someone lying about having the aforementioned bits of paper.
My only real regret was that I didn't quite 'get it' at that point, so didn't work as hard at it as I should have done.
But they're definitely 'vendor lead'. Some day, there might be a 'real' 'system admin' cert, but ... well, Chartered Engineer takes a whole lot of effort to accomplish, where 'certs' are generally short and sweet.
Not that they're a bad idea if you can convince an employer to get you through 'em :)
That's not to say I haven't found 'programming skills' useful, I have, but they're a part of a repetoire and aren't actually all that critical. But then, so's a whole host of other skills, like being able to drive, speak a second language, project management, formal document writing and an understanding of accounting and finance.
I'd go as far as saying you'll have an easier time introducing an 'average man off the shop floor' to IT, than you would getting an IT guru 'attuned' to how this particular company works, operates and what their needs are.
It's very rare to find someone with the precise combination of vendor specific certifications, and it's actually much more useful to find someone with experience in the 'relevant area' e.g. 'has done firewalls' rather than 'has got Checkpoint Firewall-1 V. 4.2.6 cert'. The former will often make the latter easy, rather than the other way around, and is more likely to find a 'good fit' than trying to match up the certs. From experience, certifications are skewed by marketing anyway :).
It is well worth your time to get together the parts to 'do the basics' of what you're trying to achieve. Run a webserver at home, build a home network, and then consider how you'd go about doing so on a larger scale - pretend you've got 200 users, who want a 24/7 service, and think about how you'd accomplish it. You'll probably find that kind of system is just too expensive for a home project, however that doesn't mean you can't try and get your head around the technologies involved.
Oh, and as a final note, Microsoft is very prevalent. You'll never get away from _some_ interaction with it. However it will do you _very_ well if you look to gain hands on (home experience) on a Unix. I've got a homogenous environment running Windows at work, and still have a couple of Linux boxes to do 'real work' on - for the end user, they don't care as long as their word docs are fine, however when it comes to network analysis, scripting, webserving or a whole host of ancillary stuff that helps 'doing sysadmin' then Linux (and Cygwin) are invaluable tools.
However, it's pretty much always a support service. Therefore you should expect that you'll end up on call. Personally I don't like that part, but can't deny the extra pay is nice.
It's also a field where experience is what really really matters. Which means it can be tough to break into. Certifications and degrees are nice, but it's my '5 years in the industry' which opens doors, not the other bits of paper.
However as a starting point in 'building your career', I will suggest you look at:
-
ITIL - IT infrastructure library. It's something that put me off initally, as it look a bit too much like icky-yuck processes and procedures. However, I've run into a _lot_ of companies that are starting to 'buy in' to the model. That wouldn't convince me, though. What did, is it's actually a fairly good way of 'doing IT'. Not the only way by any means, but one worth looking at, if only because then you have a basis for comparison.
- SAGE Systems Administrators guild, a subdivision of Usenix.
- BCS British Computer Society
- The Practice of System and Network Administration (Paperback) - A personal favourite, this is a brilliant book, because it covers the _theory_ of systems admin.
Don't neglect the 'soft' skills though. I know many hardcore techies hate the idea, but the ability to wear a suit, and look good and confident when doing so is _very_ useful. Also 'social interaction' skills. Systems admin is as much about the people (ab)using the system as the system itself.As far as I can tell, your bits of paper serve to help you secure an interview. But the field's .... well sufficiently complicated and convoluted that your ability to learn, research and innovate are far more important. As is your ability to show you can do this.
As long as I can point a camera at my TV, or a microphone next to my speakers, copy protection is just not going to work.
OK, so you have to play around a bit to get a high quality copy, (like syncing with the TV refresh, or making sure that 'noise' is minimised) but fundamentally, you're reproducing what the eye and ear are doing - picking up the 'transmission' from your TV or speakers, but storing it electronically rather than biologically.
This is why DRM, DMCA etc. cannot succeed. The media companies are already obselete, they just don't know it yet. You cannot treat 'information' that can be trivially replicated as a physical object, and expect that to work.
Sadly though, they are.
However, in a general sense, from what we've seen so far, if the associated thugs 'think you are' then that's probably enough for them to come and stamp on your choc-ice.
So far, I think I've seen several sources for DeCSS code, from a prime number that happens to unpack in gzip, to a sequence of hexidecimal DNS records.
This is fundamentally why the 'DMCA' style laws are asnine and futile - you're being sold a box. And the key to the box. And then told that you're not allowed to open the box, that you bought, except how and when the person who sold it to you says.
I have no problems with copyright law, but trying to treat digital media as physical items is just doomed to failure.