Open office plans seem to be the fad for this decade. (See: "Management by magazine article".) The fact that it demonstrably only works for certain types of environments, and doesn't work at all in an environment where the workers are expected to dive deep and perform long complicated tasks, hasn't made an impression on upper management yet.
As our group had more than one physical location, conference calls were common. Very quickly after we switched to an open office plan, came an edict that employees would be required to book conference rooms for calls. The noise was, naturally, disrupting the people trying to write or debug software. (It wasn't just that the cubicle walls were gone, it was also that we were all sitting elbow-to-elbow in a 1950's-era bullpen arrangement. Wow, how progressive...)
Shortly after that, it was discovered that we did not have enough conference rooms to meet demand. This was never solved, and it became common to see employees in the cafeteria or visitor's lounge trying to manage a conference on their cell phones, with laptop balanced on their knees. This raised the issue of discussing company intellectual property in a semi-public place, but I don't think that was ever solved either.
In the interest of public safety, wouldn't we want to secure those weapons first?
They are secured. Each one is strapped to a personal bodyguard who has been trained in defensive and offensive maneuvers.
It so happens I'm a self defense instructor, and I've had some training in weapons retention. I don't *teach* weapons retention, so I haven't kept it fresh, and the training I had was some years ago. I don't know how effective I'd be right now. Similarly, I'm sure that cops get weapons retention training in police academy. But I wonder if they ever get refreshers? Or do they depend on a few classes they took several years ago to avoid losing their weapons?
Moreover, a weapon strapped to a personal bodyguard who has been trained in defensive and offensive maneuvers who is currently dead or unconscious is most definitely *not* secure.
Isn't it a public safety issue that anyone could take a cop's gun and use it on someone else (or the cop)?
Not as much of one as having the weapon refuse to operate when the cop most needs to use it. In this example, all you need is an RF jammer to block the authorization signal and the gun isn't one anymore.
Ok, granted. But say I have a weapon for defense of family and self, and occasion to use it. What would be the point of having one that might refuse to operate?
I wonder about this. You're most likely right, but I have to ask, why should cops be excepted? The most visible, prolific sidearm presence is attached to a uniformed officer. In the interest of public safety, wouldn't we want to secure those weapons first? Isn't it a public safety issue that anyone could take a cop's gun and use it on someone else (or the cop)?
That's true. And as a customer, I take that to heart. If the business can't be bothered to provide reasonable customer support, and just wants me to go away, I will -- to a competitor.
I've stuck with some vendors simply because when I call their tech support, a knowledgeable, articulate human being answers. And I've dropped vendors who make it unreasonably difficult to talk to a knowledgeable support person when necessary. If only upper management wouldn't continue to trap us in long term contracts with vendors who don't give a crap. They do it because it's our job to wrestle with the consequences of their decisions.
It occurred to me long ago that a great attack vector would be to have an open network with a common default SSID. Especially for people who's gadgets autoconnect to whatever their default wireless name is at home.
I don't connect to any open wireless network named after an ISP or a router manufacturer, and all the wifi systems I've set up have unique, meaningful names. (And they're not open, but that's another discussion.)
For an internet provider they are pretty unclear of how IP protocols work. a) there is no such thing as instantaneous b) there is no such thing as error free transmission. c) any given packet can take a different route d) packets can arrive out of order e) packets can be dropped If they want guaranteed bandwidth they are using the wrong network.
Good points. I would say, they certainly know how IP protocols work. They're betting on the unwashed public (including congress, with the possible exception of Ron Wyden) not knowing how IP protocols work.
It's not just waste of money. Let's assume that pharmacies and hospitals dispose of their out-of-date drugs in a responsible fashion. (Really?? Yeah, ok, just for the sake of argument. Bear with me here.)
What are Ma and Pa Kettle going to do when their antidepressants and heart medication and statins and pain medication pass their sell-by date? There's supposed to be some way to responsibly dispose of these medications, and I'm sure that lots of people in the well-educated crowd here know what it is, or at least know why it's important and would be responsible enough to do some googling.
But regular people, who don't know or care about the consequences, -- they're going to throw them in the trash, or flush them.
So pragmatically, we're not just wasting money, we're also increasing the amount of drugs that could reach the water table.
Yes yes, I know, it's probable that "drugs in our drinking water" is being over reported (fear porn). But still, as a society, are we being responsible here?
You are absolutely right. That's an excellent point. So perhaps what's needed are some easy to use tools that allow average people to use sophisticated techniques.
Then, and therein lies the fun, whoever builds and distributes that tool is an enemy of the state.
When the law is "whatever I say", there's no loophole.
I think one could argue that using any method to circumvent censorship by the glorious people's republic of China, including perhaps even rotating the image, could make one an enemy of the state. Why not go for the gusto?
You are absolutely right. That's an excellent point. So perhaps what's needed are some easy to use tools that allow average people to use sophisticated techniques.
Well, ok, your questions sound rhetorical, so this will probably be unwelcome, but I think the difference is intent.
In the US it's done for a variety of reasons -- intellectual property, porn, unlawful content, politically incorrect (ahem-facebook), and in China it's specifically targeted at political dissidents. Here we can say Apple (or Microsoft if that makes you more comfortable) is being a dick, I'll use some other service. Over there it's more problematic, because (a) it's the government doing it (yeah, I know, bear with me) *and* (b) it's specifically targeted at anti-government speech. Which we would call, over here, free speech.
So over here someone can post a photo holding the bloody decapitated head of the president... no wait, that's a bad example... no, on further thought, it's a valid example. She was able to post the image without having it deleted by the government. Other bad things happened, but government deletion in transit wasn't one of them.
So, I'd argue, not hypocritical at all. Freedom and privacy are complex issues, and I don't think there's anyone within the sound of my voice that believes we in the US have complete freedom. Whether we should or not would be a lively discussion. But I think we can agree that people in china have much less freedom.
I'm sorry. I completely understand the experience. In my case HR didn't come after me until after I had started work, and it took literally months to work out, including considerable effort and research on my part. I had no idea there was a government FISA website that had records back to the beginning of time.
A friend of mine graduated from ITT back in the eighties. Aren't they out of business now? He went through something similar recently, and was ultimately unsuccessful getting a copy of his transcript. Similar to my experience, but different school.
Yes, you called it. I went to one of thim ther' tekneekal schools. Probably the worst decision I have ever made in a reasonably long life, and the one life decision that has had the most far-reaching consequence. Kids, don't try this at home. Really. Go to a real college. And when you get your diploma, put it somewhere really safe.
I recognize that this job could be the last technical job I ever have, unless I go into business for myself. To that end, I have a side business that's starting to make money. I'm not stupid. Well, any more.
The reason I related the story was that I strongly suspect these collection agencies keep track of the people who actually (eventually) made good on their debts, and put them in a "sucker" file, some poor schmuck who could perhaps be shaken down multiple times. Had I the backbone to stand up to them at the time, things might have been different. Had the amount been greater, perhaps I would have. Maybe picking an amount I'd be more likely to just pay off to be done with it, was part of the plan. And maybe my resistance to the third payoff was what finally got them to drop me as a "client".
I really wonder about that. I had difficulty getting a job after college, and like a lot of others my student loan went into collection. Two years after graduation, in another state, I landed a well paying job, contacted the collection agency through an old notice and made payments, eventually paying it off.
And then, about a year later, I got contacted by a collection agency (the same or a different, I don't know -- didn't keep track) that I still owed $500-something on my student loan. I was doing well at the time, so I paid it off again just to make it all go away.
Three years later, I moved to a different state and got a new job, and a collection agency *again* contacted me about my student loan, saying I still owed a little over $200. I argued vehemently that I had already paid off the damn thing twice. They got really rude over the next few weeks, called work and home at all hours, and being nasty to whomever answered. I swallowed my pride and paid it off for a third time.
That was a couple decades ago, and I haven't gotten any calls since. But here's the punchline. My most recent job required that I provide evidence of my degree. I'd never been asked this before, and looking through all my decades-old paperwork, some never opened through moves from one state to another to another, I couldn't find my diploma.
No problem, right? Contact the school, get a copy of the diploma, send it to HR.
The school had no record that I had ever attended.
Let that sink in for a moment.
So I went backwards from the student loan docs, which showed that I attended the school from year1 to year2. The school eventually had to admit that I had been a student there, but they had lost all records of that time. I got them to put that in a letter, which my work grudgingly accepted. Next time I'm not putting my education on my resume.
Slashdot Mirror
Open office plans seem to be the fad for this decade. (See: "Management by magazine article".) The fact that it demonstrably only works for certain types of environments, and doesn't work at all in an environment where the workers are expected to dive deep and perform long complicated tasks, hasn't made an impression on upper management yet.
As our group had more than one physical location, conference calls were common. Very quickly after we switched to an open office plan, came an edict that employees would be required to book conference rooms for calls. The noise was, naturally, disrupting the people trying to write or debug software. (It wasn't just that the cubicle walls were gone, it was also that we were all sitting elbow-to-elbow in a 1950's-era bullpen arrangement. Wow, how progressive...)
Shortly after that, it was discovered that we did not have enough conference rooms to meet demand. This was never solved, and it became common to see employees in the cafeteria or visitor's lounge trying to manage a conference on their cell phones, with laptop balanced on their knees. This raised the issue of discussing company intellectual property in a semi-public place, but I don't think that was ever solved either.
If the IP is that valuable, why are the servers connected to the internet?
If people outside the LAN absolutely need access, provide it with two factor authentication with a hardware token. It's not rocket science.
But if they were really serious about protecting their IP, air gap it, and insist that the principles who need access do so via private LAN.
It almost seems like they need something to complain about.
In the interest of public safety, wouldn't we want to secure those weapons first?
They are secured. Each one is strapped to a personal bodyguard who has been trained in defensive and offensive maneuvers.
It so happens I'm a self defense instructor, and I've had some training in weapons retention. I don't *teach* weapons retention, so I haven't kept it fresh, and the training I had was some years ago. I don't know how effective I'd be right now. Similarly, I'm sure that cops get weapons retention training in police academy. But I wonder if they ever get refreshers? Or do they depend on a few classes they took several years ago to avoid losing their weapons?
Moreover, a weapon strapped to a personal bodyguard who has been trained in defensive and offensive maneuvers who is currently dead or unconscious is most definitely *not* secure.
Isn't it a public safety issue that anyone could take a cop's gun and use it on someone else (or the cop)?
Not as much of one as having the weapon refuse to operate when the cop most needs to use it. In this example, all you need is an RF jammer to block the authorization signal and the gun isn't one anymore.
Ok, granted. But say I have a weapon for defense of family and self, and occasion to use it. What would be the point of having one that might refuse to operate?
> (likely cops are excepted)
I wonder about this. You're most likely right, but I have to ask, why should cops be excepted? The most visible, prolific sidearm presence is attached to a uniformed officer. In the interest of public safety, wouldn't we want to secure those weapons first? Isn't it a public safety issue that anyone could take a cop's gun and use it on someone else (or the cop)?
That's true. And as a customer, I take that to heart. If the business can't be bothered to provide reasonable customer support, and just wants me to go away, I will -- to a competitor.
I've stuck with some vendors simply because when I call their tech support, a knowledgeable, articulate human being answers. And I've dropped vendors who make it unreasonably difficult to talk to a knowledgeable support person when necessary. If only upper management wouldn't continue to trap us in long term contracts with vendors who don't give a crap. They do it because it's our job to wrestle with the consequences of their decisions.
That's true, and it makes food taste like ashes and regret, but I'm wondering if that's the only reason.
hm. Watch films from the seventies. Notice how skinny everyone is.
What? Your home wifi doesn't have a unique SSID?
It occurred to me long ago that a great attack vector would be to have an open network with a common default SSID. Especially for people who's gadgets autoconnect to whatever their default wireless name is at home.
I don't connect to any open wireless network named after an ISP or a router manufacturer, and all the wifi systems I've set up have unique, meaningful names. (And they're not open, but that's another discussion.)
No, don't hold back. Tell us how you really feel.
(um, it's just a phone...)
Orphaned again...
After the fifth or sixth update, it would suddenly stop using generic nails and would only use proprietary nails from the hammer's manufacturer.
Two takeaways from TFA: (1) Russia has junk news too. (2) Glad to see J Wraps found somewhere to dump their excess product.
For an internet provider they are pretty unclear of how IP protocols work.
a) there is no such thing as instantaneous
b) there is no such thing as error free transmission.
c) any given packet can take a different route
d) packets can arrive out of order
e) packets can be dropped
If they want guaranteed bandwidth they are using the wrong network.
Good points. I would say, they certainly know how IP protocols work. They're betting on the unwashed public (including congress, with the possible exception of Ron Wyden) not knowing how IP protocols work.
Why is Comcast Using Self-driving Cars To Justify Abolishing Net Neutrality?
Because they think it'll work.
Does there need to be another reason?
It's not just waste of money. Let's assume that pharmacies and hospitals dispose of their out-of-date drugs in a responsible fashion. (Really?? Yeah, ok, just for the sake of argument. Bear with me here.)
What are Ma and Pa Kettle going to do when their antidepressants and heart medication and statins and pain medication pass their sell-by date? There's supposed to be some way to responsibly dispose of these medications, and I'm sure that lots of people in the well-educated crowd here know what it is, or at least know why it's important and would be responsible enough to do some googling.
But regular people, who don't know or care about the consequences, -- they're going to throw them in the trash, or flush them.
So pragmatically, we're not just wasting money, we're also increasing the amount of drugs that could reach the water table.
Yes yes, I know, it's probable that "drugs in our drinking water" is being over reported (fear porn). But still, as a society, are we being responsible here?
You are absolutely right. That's an excellent point. So perhaps what's needed are some easy to use tools that allow average people to use sophisticated techniques.
Then, and therein lies the fun, whoever builds and distributes that tool is an enemy of the state.
When the law is "whatever I say", there's no loophole.
I think one could argue that using any method to circumvent censorship by the glorious people's republic of China, including perhaps even rotating the image, could make one an enemy of the state. Why not go for the gusto?
OMG. Are you telling us that steganography is the reason why there are so many pictures of cats on the Internet?
No of course n... wait... Wow. That's... actually pretty insightful.
You are absolutely right. That's an excellent point. So perhaps what's needed are some easy to use tools that allow average people to use sophisticated techniques.
Well, ok, your questions sound rhetorical, so this will probably be unwelcome, but I think the difference is intent.
In the US it's done for a variety of reasons -- intellectual property, porn, unlawful content, politically incorrect (ahem-facebook), and in China it's specifically targeted at political dissidents. Here we can say Apple (or Microsoft if that makes you more comfortable) is being a dick, I'll use some other service. Over there it's more problematic, because (a) it's the government doing it (yeah, I know, bear with me) *and* (b) it's specifically targeted at anti-government speech. Which we would call, over here, free speech.
So over here someone can post a photo holding the bloody decapitated head of the president... no wait, that's a bad example... no, on further thought, it's a valid example. She was able to post the image without having it deleted by the government. Other bad things happened, but government deletion in transit wasn't one of them.
So, I'd argue, not hypocritical at all. Freedom and privacy are complex issues, and I don't think there's anyone within the sound of my voice that believes we in the US have complete freedom. Whether we should or not would be a lively discussion. But I think we can agree that people in china have much less freedom.
Nope, already lost interest.
Things tend to go back and forth. You might be right.
I'm sorry. I completely understand the experience. In my case HR didn't come after me until after I had started work, and it took literally months to work out, including considerable effort and research on my part. I had no idea there was a government FISA website that had records back to the beginning of time.
A friend of mine graduated from ITT back in the eighties. Aren't they out of business now? He went through something similar recently, and was ultimately unsuccessful getting a copy of his transcript. Similar to my experience, but different school.
Yes, you called it. I went to one of thim ther' tekneekal schools. Probably the worst decision I have ever made in a reasonably long life, and the one life decision that has had the most far-reaching consequence. Kids, don't try this at home. Really. Go to a real college. And when you get your diploma, put it somewhere really safe.
I recognize that this job could be the last technical job I ever have, unless I go into business for myself. To that end, I have a side business that's starting to make money. I'm not stupid. Well, any more.
The reason I related the story was that I strongly suspect these collection agencies keep track of the people who actually (eventually) made good on their debts, and put them in a "sucker" file, some poor schmuck who could perhaps be shaken down multiple times. Had I the backbone to stand up to them at the time, things might have been different. Had the amount been greater, perhaps I would have. Maybe picking an amount I'd be more likely to just pay off to be done with it, was part of the plan. And maybe my resistance to the third payoff was what finally got them to drop me as a "client".
I'm curious if they've tried steganography to get around censorship? Hiding the photo inside another photo or document?
Or maybe they *are* doing that, and the reason we're not hearing about it is because it's working.
So... never mind...
"deeply flawed" documentation.
I really wonder about that. I had difficulty getting a job after college, and like a lot of others my student loan went into collection. Two years after graduation, in another state, I landed a well paying job, contacted the collection agency through an old notice and made payments, eventually paying it off.
And then, about a year later, I got contacted by a collection agency (the same or a different, I don't know -- didn't keep track) that I still owed $500-something on my student loan. I was doing well at the time, so I paid it off again just to make it all go away.
Three years later, I moved to a different state and got a new job, and a collection agency *again* contacted me about my student loan, saying I still owed a little over $200. I argued vehemently that I had already paid off the damn thing twice. They got really rude over the next few weeks, called work and home at all hours, and being nasty to whomever answered. I swallowed my pride and paid it off for a third time.
That was a couple decades ago, and I haven't gotten any calls since. But here's the punchline. My most recent job required that I provide evidence of my degree. I'd never been asked this before, and looking through all my decades-old paperwork, some never opened through moves from one state to another to another, I couldn't find my diploma.
No problem, right? Contact the school, get a copy of the diploma, send it to HR.
The school had no record that I had ever attended.
Let that sink in for a moment.
So I went backwards from the student loan docs, which showed that I attended the school from year1 to year2. The school eventually had to admit that I had been a student there, but they had lost all records of that time. I got them to put that in a letter, which my work grudgingly accepted. Next time I'm not putting my education on my resume.