Then the poor family is stuck trying to figure out if they want him found or not, and the state has no motive to look hard, because they're not likely to get their money back.
In states that don't charge for rescues, the usual argument is that people wouldn't call if they needed rescue because they wouldn't want to pay. My thought is, if they REALLY needed rescue, they'd call.
I'd consider that more of a grey area. Those people are paid specifically for traffic enforcement, cleanup, maintenance, etc, and the people who are in the accidents are liable for damages (through their insurance), and are on the road where they are supposed to be.
In cases like this where someone gets themselves lost, it's a lot less clear-cut. The state usually puts forth a ton of effort to find these people, and often they end up eating thousands of dollars of rescue costs racked up by some joker who didn't even take the most basic precautions.
This particular situation annoys me because he didn't tell anyone specifically where he was going, didn't have a radio beacon, didn't seem to have a radio, or didn't feel the need to use it when he got into trouble. That's irresponsible, but he can be assumed to have had a pretty good idea of what he was doing, and obviously was capable and experienced.
The ones that really jerk my chain are the people who have zero competence and zero experience who are constantly getting stuck on mountains, lost in national parks, stranded in the ocean, etc, etc, etc. They need to be held accountable for their lack of planning.
So you're advocating a sliding scale based on how much of him they found? Would you be arguing for them to pay if he HAD been found?
Those searches are insanely expensive, and 99% of the time they're needed because the person who gets lost fails to take precautions.
There is a point at which you need to take some responsibility for your own safety. You need to make sure people know where you're going, you need to make sure you can be found. Fossett did none of that, and cost the state a bundle looking for him.
I definitely think some reimbursement is in order.
I actually thought it was fine. The guys sexual preference wasn't related to the story in any way, so how are you going to bring it up?
It does, however, add credible weight to the younger Dumbledore's situation with whatever-his-name was...It neatly solves an otherwise inexplicable moral situation, where you have a guy who has been built up to be a paragon of virtue, yet who spent years of his youth in an inexplicably close relationship with a person whose ethics were diametrically opposed.
All the crazy that gets added to it later is purely an issue of prejudice; if what's-his-name had been a female, the sexual relationship would have been assumed automatically.
Skunk is no fun if you really get nailed, but a lot of hunters use skunk-scent to fool prey animals' sense of smell...It's definitely possible to get used to it.
I'm with you regarding perfume/cologne...More than a little and my eyes itch and water. Walking past a "Bath and Bodyworks" is a test of olfactory endurance.
People always bring out the Mac example; sometimes I agree, but other times the interface makes me homicidal. They're well designed, but if you need something a little different, you're screwed. You just can't do it.
There is no evidence he lives in Utah...Or Texas apparently.
But as Strunk and White would say, "Form the possessive by adding 's." Without the apostrophe, the parent post is correct; it's an attempt at a plural form.
The fact that its a crappy feature makes me think it must have originated with a developer.
Developers and User Interfaces don't tend to get along well; you need to go out on the street and grab a couple of people wearing matching outfits and get them to draw your UI on a napkin or something.
The Bikeshed/Barn issue is at the heart of this problem. No single interface makes everyone happy; a good UI will allow users to take a degree of ownership by allowing basic cosmetic changes.
And an application that is flexible with a lot of configuration options is usually a lot more fun to use than something that is static, or can only be changed through registry/config file changes.
The thing with this sort of program is that it'd be trivial to put a "choose your own color" option in the configuration, so everyone could make the bikeshed whatever goddamn color they wanted.
Instead, the dev team has hashed this whole thing out amongst themselves in a "bikeshed" style debate, and they've come up with this fricking solution which they had to sweat blood to get everyone to agree to, and then it turns out that users don't like it?
I can see why they're stuck on their solution, but I CANNOT understand why they don't understand that extra UI options are critical to a good app. Forcing users to deal with a UI that cannot be configured at all is not the way it goes in todays programming.
Or disappear into coffee shops with free wifi, and, you know, coffee.
"This kind of activity is carried in the shadows, as soon as you shine a bright light, they disappear into the bushes..."
Does anyone else find that sentence to be hilarious? Truly, there is no light of righteous freedom like that of blocking an IP address to drive the shadowy evils of government into the scratchy bushes of ignominy. Truth is on the march!
No, but you can't expect a new employer to hire you as a senior sysadmin when your resume experience isn't sysadmin experience.
You can probably get a lower-ranking sysadmin job; there are a number of admin positions that require some programming, so move into that, build up your skills and your resume, then move up.
My "speciality" is programming and unix administration...Basically I develop apps and maintain the infrastructure that they're deployed on. It's a weird sort of niche; I'm really valuable to places that need a flexible staff. Language-wise, it's mainly Java and scripting languages (the 3 P's).
You can always break out of a niche, but you can't expect to make a lateral move; if you do sysadmin work, you won't have the same amount of experience to back you up as if you stayed a programmer.
If you literally can't think of another thing to do with your degree, I don't know what to tell you. I'm not as specialized, so maybe it's easier for me.
It sucks to be in a small country; don't know what to tell you, since its not an issue I face. I could move two thousand miles away and still be in the same country.
I'd look for telecommuting work; Java is a hugely popular language (it really is; I don't know why) so if you have a bunch of years of java experience you might try bidding contract work or something. If you're good at the contract stuff you can make a LOT more than at a regular desk job, and your hours are a lot more flexible.
Basically, if you want to make a change, keep your eyes open. There is always something.
Eh. You can make a good living doing something besides IT. I got into IT because I hated the fuzzy-minded crap I was doing and longed for some of that cold hard machine logic. One day I'll get sick of the hours and the work week, and do something else.
The family thing is real, but usually if you can do something like IT then you're suited for a lot of other work as well. All you really need is a decent wage and insurance. Lot of times you can move to a place where the cost of living is different, and a lower paying job will get you a similar quality of life.
It's also worthwhile to just look for a different IT job. IT is a huge field; you can't dismiss it all with any one set of issues (unless they're of the "I hate technology" sort).
IT sucks. It's a hard, high-stress field that demands constant study and practice.
This is why it pays well.
Don't expect to be able to hop out of the field and be able to command the same salary unless you have some well-established, lucrative backup profession.
If you really can't take it anymore, expect to downsize your life somewhat. Lack of stress may make up for lack of cash.
I'd rather the price be higher. Domains are cheap, and cheap leads to massive amounts of squatting. If you really need 100 personal domain names, then you shouldn't object to paying for them.
I can't believe all the people who are freaking out about this. This isn't a remote exploit. This isn't a massive security hole. This is trivial stuff that anyone who is reasonably computer savvy should be able to do.
They just hire consultants. It's pointless to have a bunch of computer security guys on your staff when it's a tiny minority of your crimes that are dealing with computer issues.
This is huge! Windows passwords aren't enough to secure my porn! Call the government! Call nasa! Call a lawyer! This is an outrage!
Seriously. Does anyone here NOT know how to pull all the data off a windows machine without a password? I can think of a half-dozen ways to do it, and there is plenty of commercial software out there if you wanted to purchase some.
If someone has physical access to your machine, it is NOT secure. This is why people use encryption.
Slashdot Mirror
It's almost a truism that whenever a children get lost, more people die trying to find the children than there are children to be found.
Just human nature.
Then the poor family is stuck trying to figure out if they want him found or not, and the state has no motive to look hard, because they're not likely to get their money back.
In states that don't charge for rescues, the usual argument is that people wouldn't call if they needed rescue because they wouldn't want to pay. My thought is, if they REALLY needed rescue, they'd call.
I'd consider that more of a grey area. Those people are paid specifically for traffic enforcement, cleanup, maintenance, etc, and the people who are in the accidents are liable for damages (through their insurance), and are on the road where they are supposed to be.
In cases like this where someone gets themselves lost, it's a lot less clear-cut. The state usually puts forth a ton of effort to find these people, and often they end up eating thousands of dollars of rescue costs racked up by some joker who didn't even take the most basic precautions.
This particular situation annoys me because he didn't tell anyone specifically where he was going, didn't have a radio beacon, didn't seem to have a radio, or didn't feel the need to use it when he got into trouble. That's irresponsible, but he can be assumed to have had a pretty good idea of what he was doing, and obviously was capable and experienced.
The ones that really jerk my chain are the people who have zero competence and zero experience who are constantly getting stuck on mountains, lost in national parks, stranded in the ocean, etc, etc, etc. They need to be held accountable for their lack of planning.
So you're advocating a sliding scale based on how much of him they found? Would you be arguing for them to pay if he HAD been found?
Those searches are insanely expensive, and 99% of the time they're needed because the person who gets lost fails to take precautions.
There is a point at which you need to take some responsibility for your own safety. You need to make sure people know where you're going, you need to make sure you can be found. Fossett did none of that, and cost the state a bundle looking for him.
I definitely think some reimbursement is in order.
I actually thought it was fine. The guys sexual preference wasn't related to the story in any way, so how are you going to bring it up?
It does, however, add credible weight to the younger Dumbledore's situation with whatever-his-name was...It neatly solves an otherwise inexplicable moral situation, where you have a guy who has been built up to be a paragon of virtue, yet who spent years of his youth in an inexplicably close relationship with a person whose ethics were diametrically opposed.
All the crazy that gets added to it later is purely an issue of prejudice; if what's-his-name had been a female, the sexual relationship would have been assumed automatically.
Skunk is no fun if you really get nailed, but a lot of hunters use skunk-scent to fool prey animals' sense of smell...It's definitely possible to get used to it.
I'm with you regarding perfume/cologne...More than a little and my eyes itch and water. Walking past a "Bath and Bodyworks" is a test of olfactory endurance.
People always bring out the Mac example; sometimes I agree, but other times the interface makes me homicidal. They're well designed, but if you need something a little different, you're screwed. You just can't do it.
There is no evidence he lives in Utah...Or Texas apparently.
But as Strunk and White would say, "Form the possessive by adding 's." Without the apostrophe, the parent post is correct; it's an attempt at a plural form.
The fact that its a crappy feature makes me think it must have originated with a developer.
Developers and User Interfaces don't tend to get along well; you need to go out on the street and grab a couple of people wearing matching outfits and get them to draw your UI on a napkin or something.
Parent is hardly trolling.
The Bikeshed/Barn issue is at the heart of this problem. No single interface makes everyone happy; a good UI will allow users to take a degree of ownership by allowing basic cosmetic changes.
And an application that is flexible with a lot of configuration options is usually a lot more fun to use than something that is static, or can only be changed through registry/config file changes.
Yes, and no.
The thing with this sort of program is that it'd be trivial to put a "choose your own color" option in the configuration, so everyone could make the bikeshed whatever goddamn color they wanted.
Instead, the dev team has hashed this whole thing out amongst themselves in a "bikeshed" style debate, and they've come up with this fricking solution which they had to sweat blood to get everyone to agree to, and then it turns out that users don't like it?
I can see why they're stuck on their solution, but I CANNOT understand why they don't understand that extra UI options are critical to a good app. Forcing users to deal with a UI that cannot be configured at all is not the way it goes in todays programming.
Not to defend microsoft, but COME ON! Who do they have doing their tech support? Is Bush doing it himself?
I find this frankly impossible to believe, and insulting on top of that.
Or disappear into coffee shops with free wifi, and, you know, coffee.
"This kind of activity is carried in the shadows, as soon as you shine a bright light, they disappear into the bushes..."
Does anyone else find that sentence to be hilarious? Truly, there is no light of righteous freedom like that of blocking an IP address to drive the shadowy evils of government into the scratchy bushes of ignominy. Truth is on the march!
No, but you can't expect a new employer to hire you as a senior sysadmin when your resume experience isn't sysadmin experience.
You can probably get a lower-ranking sysadmin job; there are a number of admin positions that require some programming, so move into that, build up your skills and your resume, then move up.
My "speciality" is programming and unix administration...Basically I develop apps and maintain the infrastructure that they're deployed on. It's a weird sort of niche; I'm really valuable to places that need a flexible staff. Language-wise, it's mainly Java and scripting languages (the 3 P's).
You can always break out of a niche, but you can't expect to make a lateral move; if you do sysadmin work, you won't have the same amount of experience to back you up as if you stayed a programmer.
If you literally can't think of another thing to do with your degree, I don't know what to tell you. I'm not as specialized, so maybe it's easier for me.
It sucks to be in a small country; don't know what to tell you, since its not an issue I face. I could move two thousand miles away and still be in the same country.
I'd look for telecommuting work; Java is a hugely popular language (it really is; I don't know why) so if you have a bunch of years of java experience you might try bidding contract work or something. If you're good at the contract stuff you can make a LOT more than at a regular desk job, and your hours are a lot more flexible.
Basically, if you want to make a change, keep your eyes open. There is always something.
Eh. You can make a good living doing something besides IT. I got into IT because I hated the fuzzy-minded crap I was doing and longed for some of that cold hard machine logic. One day I'll get sick of the hours and the work week, and do something else.
The family thing is real, but usually if you can do something like IT then you're suited for a lot of other work as well. All you really need is a decent wage and insurance. Lot of times you can move to a place where the cost of living is different, and a lower paying job will get you a similar quality of life.
It's also worthwhile to just look for a different IT job. IT is a huge field; you can't dismiss it all with any one set of issues (unless they're of the "I hate technology" sort).
IT sucks. It's a hard, high-stress field that demands constant study and practice.
This is why it pays well.
Don't expect to be able to hop out of the field and be able to command the same salary unless you have some well-established, lucrative backup profession.
If you really can't take it anymore, expect to downsize your life somewhat. Lack of stress may make up for lack of cash.
I'd rather the price be higher. Domains are cheap, and cheap leads to massive amounts of squatting. If you really need 100 personal domain names, then you shouldn't object to paying for them.
"If someone has physical access to your machine, it is NOT secure. This is why people use encryption."
Windows doesn't HAVE an encrypted file system...This is talking about breaking the encryption on Windows passwords which is a lot easier.
Truly, a non-working computer is the ultimate in protection.
Physical access is always a killer. Your only safeguard at that point is encryption.
I can't think it would take all that long anyway. I reset the admin password on my windows laptop the other day, and it was fairly trivial.
Yea, look at linux...No way would it be possible to reset the root password if you had physical access to the machine.
I can't believe all the people who are freaking out about this. This isn't a remote exploit. This isn't a massive security hole. This is trivial stuff that anyone who is reasonably computer savvy should be able to do.
They just hire consultants. It's pointless to have a bunch of computer security guys on your staff when it's a tiny minority of your crimes that are dealing with computer issues.
This is huge! Windows passwords aren't enough to secure my porn! Call the government! Call nasa! Call a lawyer! This is an outrage!
Seriously. Does anyone here NOT know how to pull all the data off a windows machine without a password? I can think of a half-dozen ways to do it, and there is plenty of commercial software out there if you wanted to purchase some.
If someone has physical access to your machine, it is NOT secure. This is why people use encryption.