... a 60-megapixel digital camera taking 40 million pictures a second. I want that camera. The data throughput must be staggering.
Of course, I'm curious how it can do 40 million pictures per second, if particles being spun around the track by superconductors can only collide 20 million times per second. I know it's a 17 mile track, but still, taking that as a base for the maximum speed you can get a particle going, it makes me wonder how you could push 60 million pixels worth of data over even a short span of cable, 40 million times per second... I'd love to see more info just on the camera, and how they manage to push that much data, that quickly.
Also, I wonder what's being done with the old supercollider that the US was building in Texas? Is it just sitting there, rusting?
1) Introduce bill with ridiculous provisions 2) Public upset over ridiculous provisions 3) Remove ridiculous provisions 4) Pass the rest of the bill, which by itself would still be ridiculous, but now everyone's happy that they "fought The Man" and won. 5) Slowly expand power and scope of existing bill until you can do really silly things with it.
Enjoy getting your computers confiscated by The Man (sorry, "Civil Asset Forfeiture") just because you have Shareaza installed. Also enjoy having Homeland Security (a government agency) notify the RIAA (a private company) when you come back home with a bootleg tape of that concert you went to. Don't forget to smile when you get sentenced to many years in prison and many tens of thousands of dollars in fines because you downloaded MP3's of an out-of-circulation album. I'm sure you all have the tens of thousands of dollars required to fight all that in court and win, right? And you can do without our assets or money or liberty while you're fighting it...
How does that line go again? "... with liberty and justice for all* " * liberty and justice sold separately
When ya'll get sick of this crap, Canada and Mexico are both just a few hours drive away.
Actually, I have done this before, admittedly I had enough staff to provide semi-reasonable coverage to all our labs, but we still locked down everything. We tried a good malware program, and even restricted user accounts, but we still ran into users doing stupid things, and it got to a point where the computers were too restricted to be useful (students need some flexibility, after all)
Eventually, we just took out the floppy drives, locked up the USB ports, set up network boot images to reimage the PCs if needed, and had the students give us a ring if they needed us to load one up. That coincided with a severe reduction in staff (well, they cut the staff, then said "figure out how to make it work") so I don't want to make any claims as to relative effectiveness... but at the end of the day it still worked.
Students, of course, had some network space for file backups, and it was pretty rare for us to turn away a usb stick or floppy (usually it was too infected to clean). And FTR, no, I wasn't exactly thrilled to be running a lab that way either... but it worked, computers stayed clean longer, and students were still satisfied with the service. All in all, for a crappy situation, it worked out rather well.
The problem isn't removable media, it's unfiltered removable media. Users just don't understand the problems that can come with the memory stick from home. I stand by the rest of my comment... no sticks in the machines, if you want to bring one in it gets scanned and linked from a machine up front, where the lab monitor sits. People can still take their stuff with them, this step just gives them one less way to fuck up the machines. (not that they won't find 99 others... damn users)
I concur, those things are a POS. I have the same problem... we have several mapped network drives, and they tend to not check if the drive letter is in use before they autoinstall. So I get calls of "I can't find it". The first time i tried a U3 on my system, the autorun program hung, and then every time thereafter as well. Eventually I got sick of trying to troubleshoot it, and just nuked it. If I were in a lab though... I'd have hot glue in all my USB ports, and one managed computer up front with a hub. "You want to use a USB stick? Sure, I'll just pop it in here, run a virus scan, and then map it as a network drive to your computer" USB sticks (and other portable HDs) are a PITA for labs or managed environments. Autoruns, virii, pr0n, data stealing, etc etc etc.
And yes, yes, it's possible to uninstall the proggy... but that doesn't help when some schmuck buys a new stick down at the campus bookstore and wanders up and plugs it in. What's so wrong with just letting Windows do all the work, why do we need a fancy autorun that does nothing?
I'm more curious about why all this information was out there to be Google'd in the first place. Where did they find info on his employment history and reasons for being fired? Was he an idiot and posted it all to his LJ, or did someone leak his personal info?
[quote]Unfortunately I didn't have any Win2K drivers for a 9-month old baby. I bet Ubuntu installs them by default, even though the GNU crowd complain they're not truly free.[/quote]
This is just BullFUD (a subtle and aromatic combination of bullshit and FUD). The **AA are unhappy with our relaxed and liberal IP laws up here, along with their inability to run around suing tens of thousands of us like they apparently do down there. So they've been trying to spread this bullfud about Canada being Piracy Central, likely in the hope of creating a bit of media noise and encouraging the current government to pass some draconian laws that would let them sue every canadian citizen at once. I already recall one/. story a while ago about how "50% of piracy comes from Canada" or some such crap, which was almost immediate refuted.
But, like all good PR strategies, truth doesn't matter, truthiness does. They'll keep throwing out these ridiculous statements, and trying to make headlines, and hope that eventually people just remember the fud, and not the truth.
The truth is that 25 million Canadians are much less of a source of piracy than 300 million americans. It's just a matter of numbers. All the **AA wants is some new laws so they can start suing us out of existence, and then they can frame the pirate problem as a European or Asian problem, stir up that xenophobic rhetoric, and then really encourage some strange new way of stamping out the "piracy problem" (net filtering, extradition treaties, etc etc) that they can't do while those Nice Canadians(tm) are still pirating up north.
Plus, we can't be evil pirates, most of us don't even have high-speed running to our igloos.
Sheesh... "If you run the spiffy, high-overhead, bells and whistles interface, you know, the one that uses more CPU and GPU, then your battery life may be shortened." Fucking shocking. I'm shocked. I had no idea that if I use my laptop more, and if I use more intensive applications, that my battery life would be shortened. Wow. I thought batteries, just, yanno, powered things for a set amount of time, and I could play games, burn dvds, run my wireless, and turn on Aero, and it would last exactly the same amount of time as it would if I just left it sitting there.
Seriously, the story here shouldn't be "aero drains your battery". It should be "For the first time since laptops became popular, MS is offering an OS that will actually last longer, when properly configured". Vista w/o Aero lasts longer on a laptop than XP. That's pretty damn impressive, actually.
Step 1) Document your concerns. How many installs are needed, how many are unlicensed, etc Step 2) Document your correspondence with your controller. Send them an email explaining (a) that unlicensed software is wrong and can result in large fines for the company (b) that you are aware of unlicensed software (c) it will cost $X to bring the company up to spec and (d) how they would like you to proceed. If they pull the Manager trick of verbally discussing the answer with you, follow up by emailing them a summary ("I want to be sure I clearly understand from our recent conversation...") Step 3) If the issue is still unresolved, bring it up with the owners/president. "Dear Mr President, we are exposed to possible fines, I haven't been able to find a solution, and I am concerned for the welfare of the company" Step 4) If the owner isn't willing to do anything... call the BSA (or whatever the software authority is in your area)
These 4 steps follow the chain of command, cover your a$$ if they try to blame you for it, and will eventually result in the right thing happening. If you're lucky, they'll realize they were in the wrong, and they'll correct things. If you're fired, hopefully there's a whistleblowers statute in your area. If there isn't... at least you're not working there anymore.
The mere fact that you'd bring up this issue says that you're not comfortable with it. So don't do it. No job is worth your self-respect.
(Of course, there's always "Option B"... just buy the damn licenses (or have them billed to the company), don't give them the option of not purchasing more. License purchasing is suddenly a part of the process. "What's that? Install Office on Bobs machine? Why, no problem! I'll just go call our vendor, buy a license number, and be right back!")
Ebay didn't kill anyone, sheesh. If he hadn't gotten the parts there, he would've gotten them somewhere else. What next, a story on how McDonalds is supporting criminals by allowing the to buy lunch there? You just don't get the big picture! If they were hungry, then they'd have been more occupied with trying to eat and they wouldn't have been able to commit their crimes! Actually, as much as I hate to encourage McDonalds... if the criminals order the Big Mac, and it does to them what it always does to me... let's just say the only thing they'll be doing that's criminal is what's done to McD's lavatories...;)
I disagree. I know everyone in my division (300+ employees in 5 cities) by name. I speak with almost everyone on a frequent basis. I, too, spend time stopping by people I haven't seen in a while, catching up, checking to see if their computers are behaving properly, or if there's something that could be better. Same with the managers. It's not a question of effort or explanation.
Let's put it this way. If my mechanic explains to me why my car isn't running, I can nod, I can pick up on keywords, I can even understand a bit of what he says. I'm not a "car guy", I don't understand the fine details under the hood... I just have a basic understanding of the concepts involved. I simply have more important things to focus my energies on, and learning the fine details of how my cars engine works isn't one of them. I trust him to not steer me wrong.
In the same way, Management doesn't understand why their computer isn't running. They nod, they pick up on keywords, maybe they even understand a bit of what I say. But they're not "Computer guys", they don't understand the fine details of the operating system... they just have a basic understanding of how to point and click. They have more important things to focus their energies on, and learning the fine details of how a computer works isn't one of them. They trust me not to steer them wrong.
Management simply aren't geeks, they don't understand how the blinkenboxen work, and they have someone to take care of it for them, so they don't have to. Trying to explain the details of why we need to replace the 5-bay RAID assembly when 2 bays are down is pointless, because they don't understand that 3 isn't good enough.
I agree with you, user satisfaction should be the key benchmark. It's definitely the first thing that gets brought up whenever performance is mentioned. I'm lucky that it's positive for me, and I'd advise anyone doing any level of user-end tech support to do the old "walk around and press flesh". Nothing gives you a worse image than being the pasty, nasty geek, hiding away in the office behind a ticket system and a locked door. Being out in the open will let you find more problems sooner, and give you a better image.
Amen. Additionally... management is going to ask you "Well, will this technically work?", and yes, technically this is one possible way to back up data. It's one of the worst possible ways, but it is one way... and as soon as you admit that it's feasible, even though not desirable, they seize those words and suddenly "crappy x86 with a huge HD" becomes the benchmark, and you have to JUSTIFY spending an extra grand on RAID and DAT.
And then, the next day, you're installing x86 w/ big HD and a script, because that's all you got money for.
As much as it pains me to be bitter and jaded, I agree with you.
The majority of suits get there by socializing, backstabbing, schmoozing, penny pinching, and slumming. If you can find one who got there based on their virtue, keep them around. Most, however, got there under questionable circumstances, and they'll keep behaving the same way when they're in there. You simply can't trust them until they prove otherwise.
On another note, I believe the BSA allows anonymous complaints to be filed. So if they're doing things they shouldn't, you can pass that along without affecting your future job references.
The sign of an incompetent department/person is one who doesn't want to be benchmarked. Not quite. An incompetent person wouldn't want any guidelines or deliverables at all. Nothing to live up to, nothing to fail at. I've got no problem having deliverables. If my boss was even moderately technically competent, I might even trust him to make some limited judgements in comparing things to outside situations. But most managers aren't. Most managers have no idea why it would take longer to install and configure Win2k Server than it does to run the Recovery Disk on their HP at home. That's why internal numbers are so much better. Having a server uptime of 99.7 as a goal, and meeting it, is easy for everyone to understand. Managers looking at a report and seeing that banks and ebay and such have 99.9, and then wondering why ours isn't the same... that's when disaster strikes.
As for job performance... again, I agree with you, people who don't want any guidelines are the ones who want to hide their incompetence. I'm happy to not be in that category. We have an internal SLA that gets lived up to, and occasionally someone pipes up and asks "Hey, how does that compare to other places?" and I give them an answer. I don't want them looking it up themselves because they don't understand the differences in situations, but I give them an honest answer, and they trust my response. If a department becomes dissatisfied, we review the SLA and change as necessary. If I had to have a meeting every time some manager went for lunch with his buddy and found out that THEY get a visit from IT within 5 minutes of their call, to explain why that isn't going to happen here... I'd never get anything done, and equally as importantly, the frame of reference for management would change. Right now, I have numbers to meet, and people to keep happy. If I do both, then things are good, and if someone comes in with a comparison, it's an improvement to an already good process. If we went with constantly comparing things to outside sources, that changes the frame of comparison. Suddenly, it's "Things are better elsewhere, why aren't they better here?". And no matter how good you run things, there's always somebody doing it better, or doing it cheaper. And as much as I'd like to believe that management would go "Hey, we're running in the top 20% of all these stats, that's great, keep it up!"... too many times, I've seen them cherrypick and go "Hey, Place X is doing better than us with fewer resources... it's time to trim things up!"
I really do hate being bitter and jaded. But unfortunately, it's all deserved.
"Are things running well?" Yes? Yes they are? Then shut the fuck up" [...] Management doesn't understand you or what you do. They're scared of you. They want to control you and marginalize you so they can eliminate you. And this embodies the attitude that wants to maintain the priesthood at all cost - keep IT mysterious and scary, rather than enlightening the business... cause that way it makes it easier to justify our toys and inefficiencies. Most of us have spent many, many years learning the ins and outs and the finicky little details of IT. You simply can't communicate that properly to someone who's spent their life focusing on a different area. Almost every time I explain a process to a manager, I explain "this is how things go when they go well. If something goes wrong, it throws the whole process out the window". And then, when something goes wrong, they come to me... Them- "I don't understand, you said this usually only takes a day...." Me-"Well, yes, but I also explained that when things go wrong, it can take longer, and something has gone wrong" Them- "I don't understand what has gone wrong, but surely it can't be that bad. I expect you'll have this up and running in a few hours" Me- "Well, I don't know the problem yet, so I can't guess at a time of repair..." Them- "Well, if it only takes you a day to do this normally, it shouldn't take you that much longer if something goes wrong... have it up by noon".
There are variations of the conversation, but they're all the same. They don't understand what's happening or how it's done, and they apply their limited knowledge in ways that make sense in the business world, but not in the IT world. And then they get upset when it doesn't work that way.
Don't let them, don't help them, don't give them any excuse [...] avoid it at all costs. And update your CV while you're doing that, cause you'll be needing it soon. I've been at my current job for going on 6 years. I have a great working agreement with my manager. He has expectations, based on internal requirements. Uptime, response time, standard SLA stuff. I either make it, or give him a reasonable reason why I didn't. He doesn't try to understand the techie stuff, he accepts my word when I tell him how long something is going to take, and if it turns out to take longer, I tell him "The -tech- in the -tech- is broken, I'll need an extra X hours to do it right", and he says "OK". He doesn't try to benchmark me on how long it would take another person to do -tech-, he doesn't keep a frickin graph of -tech- response times and try to shoehorn me into it... I tell him how long it's going to take, and he trusts my expertise. If there's a business reason that he needs it sooner, he tells me, and we negotiate what I'm going to put on the back burner to get it done. If it simply can't be done for technical reasons, I tell him, and again, he accepts my word. This is the way things should be. If he was comparing what I told him to a list of reports of unrelated circumstances and trying to compare them, even though he doesn't understand why they're not the same... that's just a disaster waiting to happen.
------- Rather than quoting all the pay stuff, I'll just say that most of my experience has been with Fortune 500 companies, and they're mostly interested in the bottom line, not in paying their people well or being industry-leading. If you're doing the job they need and they can get away with paying you 10k less than average, they will. If you're getting 10k more than average, and they can get someone to come in and do it for 10k less than average, they'll do it. It's sad, and I would be very happy to be somewhere that wouldn't, but it's the way things run. Money is everything, if they can get moderately acceptable performance for a lot less money, they'll do it.
Yes, Businesses compare themselves to other Businesses. This isn't a business, this is a department in a business, a service department at that. If the services are being provided in an acceptable fashion, that's what should count.
Additionally, even when comparisons are occurring, management isn't in a position to compare. They simply don't have the expertise. They can compare sales, or throughput, or numbers, but asking them to understand that a backup server with RAID and a DAT tape drive is fundamentally different than taking an old PC, slapping a big hard drive into it, and using a scheduled batch file to xcopy everything over... well, they might as well be asking to be fundamentally involved in your selection of a heart donor.
I got a benchmark for ya. "Are things running well?" Yes? Yes they are? Then shut the fuck up and stop asking me to waste time comparing myself to other people. (This method of managerial interaction is derived from the groundbreaking book "Shut the fuck up" by Dr Denis Leary)
Seriously, it's not an "innocent" request. It never is. First, they just want to know how you compare. Then, they want to know why you're not the absolute bestest in the whole universe. Then they compare you against departments with fewer people. "Hmm, seems we could get comparable results with 2 fewer bodies". Then each employee is evaluating their specific performance trying to justify their job. Or you're filling out "Time code sheets" to tell them what you do in each 6 minute block of time. Pretty soon you're hearing about their buddy Steve, who has his entire office and web presence run by one part time summer intern who happily works for $6/hour plus tips.
Evaluate your performance based on internal expectations. You want great uptime on the web server? Why, we were only down for 2 hours last month. Compared to previous months, that's great! You want quick response to employee problems? Our average response time for properly filed tickets was down %4 compared to last quarter. That's the way you evaluate. If you start giving these fuckers examples of how other companies are doing, they'll cherry-pick and start challenging you to match. "Why, there's a place in Wisconsin that only has 1 tech covering 400 people! I don't know what this 'Wyse terminal' thing is, but surely if just one guy can cover all those people, we're overstaffed here!"
I know it seems like it could be good. "Why, we're outperforming most other companies, surely they'll see this and use it as criteria to give us better raises/more benefits/better perks". NO. NO, they won't. Just NO. Come review time, you could be leading 90% of the field, and they'll go on about the top 10% and how those guys earn less than you, so they shouldn't give you a raise. Or they'll go on about how other companies have their helpdesk techs do server support too, so they don't need your $80k server admin. If you're underpaid, and everyone else makes more than you, you can show them that too, and they'll nod in an interested fashion, they'll hum and haw, and they'll end up giving you some bullshit excuse about budget constraints. If you make more than other people, expect a pay freeze or cut. Even if fall in the middle of the bell curve, expect them to find a reason to lump you with the folks on the bottom of the curve.
Management doesn't understand you or what you do. They're scared of you. They want to control you and marginalize you so they can eliminate you. Don't let them, don't help them, don't give them any excuse. No matter how much you train them, or explain to them, or draw them little fucking flowcharts in Visio with pretty colours, what you do is still voodoo to them. You push keys on the magic box, typing 10x faster than they can, and you get it to do things they couldn't even dream of, and you do it really easily, and that makes them feel dumb. And just like stupid bullies on the playground, they want to get back at you, subconciously perhaps, but they still do. They want to sit there across from you, at their big fancy desks in their spotless shiny offices, because that's their one time to feel superior to you, to be in control of you, unlike all the other times when you're the magician who just makes miracles happen.
Don't fall for it. Rephrase their request, turn it around on them, avoid it at all costs. Does your accounting department have to compare themselves to other businesses? Do your managers have to go around finding out how other managers in other companies are doing? Fuck no. Don't let them treat you any different than any other department. They're just doing this because they don't understand what you do. Don't explain it to them, just give them numbers based on internal statistics so they can sit back and go "phew, IT is performing well, I'm happy".
Just remember folks, any time anyone in management opens their mouth, echo these words in your head:
I enjoy fragging some chump as much as anyone else, but if they lost money every time I got a good shot in, I'd actually start to feel bad after a few shots.
Quick story: A few years ago, was playing Quake 3, Weapons Factory Arena mod, at a friends place. I discovered that when you turned on Player Name Labels, if you passed your crosshairs over an area that you could shoot through but couldn't see through (like a curtain over a window), the player name would pop up when you went over them, even though you couldn't actually see them. So, I did what any good sniper would do. I found a hole to hide in, pointed my gun at the window, and waited for labels to start popping up. A few shots later I had the exact height for headshots. Some chucklehead started running in there. I shot him. He ran back. I shot him again. He tried to sneak back in. I shot him again. All headshots. He started doing nothing but running from the spawn point to this room, trying to find a way to avoid me. He'd duck, he'd run back and forth, he'd bunnyjump. All the while he was cursing me, accusing me of cheating, and going completely rabid and foamy-mouth. I must have headshotted him 50 times before the timer ran out. I thought it was hilarious. I'd found a small... glitch... (not a hack, not really a cheat, just a bit of a glitch), expected to only use it once or twice before people clued in and stayed out of that room, and instead I got this chump (or chumpette) who just went batty that I kept headshotting them when I couldn't see them. I laughed my ass off, so did my friend, so did most of the other people playing. Now, if he lost a buck every time I nailed him... I'd really feel bad. Sure, it's his fault, but still, $50 lost and you don't understand how you lost it? That would suck.
Also brings to mind the old Descent days. We used to play v1 multiplayer in the university LAN. It was awesome 8 of us rippin it up. Thanks to my ability to think 3D (vs most of the other guys who all thought in terms of "flat"), I was the resident sniper, hanging nose down over doorways with homing missiles ready, jumping out of pits or corners in the ceiling, and of course, hiding out while they all fought, and then wiping out the winner.:) All perfectly acceptable in a winner-take-all game for fun. But if I mega-missile someone up the ass because they went blasting through a doorway without looking, and then nail everyone who comes for their loot, and then nail the respawns who come looking for a powerup... well, it just doesn't sound as fun when there's serious money to be lost for everyone.
We've all had those days when we just can't accept that we're losing, and we have to keep trying (I did that yesterday in WoW... stupid spider queen). And while that's all fine when it's for fun, or when there's a 1-time bet on it... if you suddenly have a crappy night and are $200 in the hole because of it... I just wouldn't want to be the cause of that. Whether they deserved it or not.
Yeah, screw Digg! Those bastards, censoring shit, trying to hide things, giving in to "The Man" and the fear of legal battles. Fuck them! Slashdot rules!
Hey, on a completely unrelated note, can anyone point me to that copy of book 3 of Scientology that was posted here a few years back? kthnx.
Just like "It's not the fall that kills you, it's the sudden stop at the end."
Or my favourite: Q: "Did you hear?? Johnny fell 20 stories and LIVED!" A: "Really? That's amazing!" Q: "Yeah, unfortunately it was off a 21 story building..."
Slashdot Mirror
... a 60-megapixel digital camera taking 40 million pictures a second. I want that camera. The data throughput must be staggering.Of course, I'm curious how it can do 40 million pictures per second, if particles being spun around the track by superconductors can only collide 20 million times per second. I know it's a 17 mile track, but still, taking that as a base for the maximum speed you can get a particle going, it makes me wonder how you could push 60 million pixels worth of data over even a short span of cable, 40 million times per second... I'd love to see more info just on the camera, and how they manage to push that much data, that quickly.
Also, I wonder what's being done with the old supercollider that the US was building in Texas? Is it just sitting there, rusting?
This pattern is getting old.
1) Introduce bill with ridiculous provisions
2) Public upset over ridiculous provisions
3) Remove ridiculous provisions
4) Pass the rest of the bill, which by itself would still be ridiculous, but now everyone's happy that they "fought The Man" and won.
5) Slowly expand power and scope of existing bill until you can do really silly things with it.
Enjoy getting your computers confiscated by The Man (sorry, "Civil Asset Forfeiture") just because you have Shareaza installed. Also enjoy having Homeland Security (a government agency) notify the RIAA (a private company) when you come back home with a bootleg tape of that concert you went to. Don't forget to smile when you get sentenced to many years in prison and many tens of thousands of dollars in fines because you downloaded MP3's of an out-of-circulation album. I'm sure you all have the tens of thousands of dollars required to fight all that in court and win, right? And you can do without our assets or money or liberty while you're fighting it...
How does that line go again? "... with liberty and justice for all* "
* liberty and justice sold separately
When ya'll get sick of this crap, Canada and Mexico are both just a few hours drive away.
Actually, I have done this before, admittedly I had enough staff to provide semi-reasonable coverage to all our labs, but we still locked down everything. We tried a good malware program, and even restricted user accounts, but we still ran into users doing stupid things, and it got to a point where the computers were too restricted to be useful (students need some flexibility, after all)
Eventually, we just took out the floppy drives, locked up the USB ports, set up network boot images to reimage the PCs if needed, and had the students give us a ring if they needed us to load one up. That coincided with a severe reduction in staff (well, they cut the staff, then said "figure out how to make it work") so I don't want to make any claims as to relative effectiveness... but at the end of the day it still worked.
Students, of course, had some network space for file backups, and it was pretty rare for us to turn away a usb stick or floppy (usually it was too infected to clean). And FTR, no, I wasn't exactly thrilled to be running a lab that way either... but it worked, computers stayed clean longer, and students were still satisfied with the service. All in all, for a crappy situation, it worked out rather well.
The problem isn't removable media, it's unfiltered removable media. Users just don't understand the problems that can come with the memory stick from home. I stand by the rest of my comment... no sticks in the machines, if you want to bring one in it gets scanned and linked from a machine up front, where the lab monitor sits. People can still take their stuff with them, this step just gives them one less way to fuck up the machines. (not that they won't find 99 others... damn users)
I concur, those things are a POS. I have the same problem... we have several mapped network drives, and they tend to not check if the drive letter is in use before they autoinstall. So I get calls of "I can't find it".
The first time i tried a U3 on my system, the autorun program hung, and then every time thereafter as well. Eventually I got sick of trying to troubleshoot it, and just nuked it.
If I were in a lab though... I'd have hot glue in all my USB ports, and one managed computer up front with a hub. "You want to use a USB stick? Sure, I'll just pop it in here, run a virus scan, and then map it as a network drive to your computer"
USB sticks (and other portable HDs) are a PITA for labs or managed environments. Autoruns, virii, pr0n, data stealing, etc etc etc.
And yes, yes, it's possible to uninstall the proggy... but that doesn't help when some schmuck buys a new stick down at the campus bookstore and wanders up and plugs it in. What's so wrong with just letting Windows do all the work, why do we need a fancy autorun that does nothing?
I'm more curious about why all this information was out there to be Google'd in the first place. Where did they find info on his employment history and reasons for being fired?
Was he an idiot and posted it all to his LJ, or did someone leak his personal info?
[quote]Unfortunately I didn't have any Win2K drivers for a 9-month old baby. I bet Ubuntu installs them by default, even though the GNU crowd complain they're not truly free.[/quote]
:)
Gold. Pure fucking gold.
Happy birthday, Unknown Device!
[quote]The story of recovering the Death Star plans?[/quote]
:)
It's funny you should mention that...
"Star Wars: Secrets of the Rebellion" will deal with that very subject (amongst others)
Read more at www.xpressentertainment.ca
This is just BullFUD (a subtle and aromatic combination of bullshit and FUD). The **AA are unhappy with our relaxed and liberal IP laws up here, along with their inability to run around suing tens of thousands of us like they apparently do down there. So they've been trying to spread this bullfud about Canada being Piracy Central, likely in the hope of creating a bit of media noise and encouraging the current government to pass some draconian laws that would let them sue every canadian citizen at once. I already recall one /. story a while ago about how "50% of piracy comes from Canada" or some such crap, which was almost immediate refuted.
But, like all good PR strategies, truth doesn't matter, truthiness does. They'll keep throwing out these ridiculous statements, and trying to make headlines, and hope that eventually people just remember the fud, and not the truth.
The truth is that 25 million Canadians are much less of a source of piracy than 300 million americans. It's just a matter of numbers. All the **AA wants is some new laws so they can start suing us out of existence, and then they can frame the pirate problem as a European or Asian problem, stir up that xenophobic rhetoric, and then really encourage some strange new way of stamping out the "piracy problem" (net filtering, extradition treaties, etc etc) that they can't do while those Nice Canadians(tm) are still pirating up north.
Plus, we can't be evil pirates, most of us don't even have high-speed running to our igloos.
Obviously, if she'd just dressed up like a Ninja instead, everything would have turned out fine...
Sheesh... "If you run the spiffy, high-overhead, bells and whistles interface, you know, the one that uses more CPU and GPU, then your battery life may be shortened." Fucking shocking. I'm shocked. I had no idea that if I use my laptop more, and if I use more intensive applications, that my battery life would be shortened. Wow. I thought batteries, just, yanno, powered things for a set amount of time, and I could play games, burn dvds, run my wireless, and turn on Aero, and it would last exactly the same amount of time as it would if I just left it sitting there.
Seriously, the story here shouldn't be "aero drains your battery". It should be "For the first time since laptops became popular, MS is offering an OS that will actually last longer, when properly configured". Vista w/o Aero lasts longer on a laptop than XP. That's pretty damn impressive, actually.
How do you handle it?
Step 1) Document your concerns. How many installs are needed, how many are unlicensed, etc
Step 2) Document your correspondence with your controller. Send them an email explaining (a) that unlicensed software is wrong and can result in large fines for the company (b) that you are aware of unlicensed software (c) it will cost $X to bring the company up to spec and (d) how they would like you to proceed. If they pull the Manager trick of verbally discussing the answer with you, follow up by emailing them a summary ("I want to be sure I clearly understand from our recent conversation...")
Step 3) If the issue is still unresolved, bring it up with the owners/president. "Dear Mr President, we are exposed to possible fines, I haven't been able to find a solution, and I am concerned for the welfare of the company"
Step 4) If the owner isn't willing to do anything... call the BSA (or whatever the software authority is in your area)
These 4 steps follow the chain of command, cover your a$$ if they try to blame you for it, and will eventually result in the right thing happening. If you're lucky, they'll realize they were in the wrong, and they'll correct things. If you're fired, hopefully there's a whistleblowers statute in your area. If there isn't... at least you're not working there anymore.
The mere fact that you'd bring up this issue says that you're not comfortable with it. So don't do it. No job is worth your self-respect.
(Of course, there's always "Option B"... just buy the damn licenses (or have them billed to the company), don't give them the option of not purchasing more. License purchasing is suddenly a part of the process. "What's that? Install Office on Bobs machine? Why, no problem! I'll just go call our vendor, buy a license number, and be right back!")
Excellent points, thanks for sharing. Shame you're AC.
I disagree. I know everyone in my division (300+ employees in 5 cities) by name. I speak with almost everyone on a frequent basis. I, too, spend time stopping by people I haven't seen in a while, catching up, checking to see if their computers are behaving properly, or if there's something that could be better. Same with the managers. It's not a question of effort or explanation.
Let's put it this way. If my mechanic explains to me why my car isn't running, I can nod, I can pick up on keywords, I can even understand a bit of what he says. I'm not a "car guy", I don't understand the fine details under the hood... I just have a basic understanding of the concepts involved. I simply have more important things to focus my energies on, and learning the fine details of how my cars engine works isn't one of them. I trust him to not steer me wrong.
In the same way, Management doesn't understand why their computer isn't running. They nod, they pick up on keywords, maybe they even understand a bit of what I say. But they're not "Computer guys", they don't understand the fine details of the operating system... they just have a basic understanding of how to point and click. They have more important things to focus their energies on, and learning the fine details of how a computer works isn't one of them. They trust me not to steer them wrong.
Management simply aren't geeks, they don't understand how the blinkenboxen work, and they have someone to take care of it for them, so they don't have to. Trying to explain the details of why we need to replace the 5-bay RAID assembly when 2 bays are down is pointless, because they don't understand that 3 isn't good enough.
I agree with you, user satisfaction should be the key benchmark. It's definitely the first thing that gets brought up whenever performance is mentioned. I'm lucky that it's positive for me, and I'd advise anyone doing any level of user-end tech support to do the old "walk around and press flesh". Nothing gives you a worse image than being the pasty, nasty geek, hiding away in the office behind a ticket system and a locked door. Being out in the open will let you find more problems sooner, and give you a better image.
Just don't expect them to understand what you do.
Amen. Additionally... management is going to ask you "Well, will this technically work?", and yes, technically this is one possible way to back up data. It's one of the worst possible ways, but it is one way... and as soon as you admit that it's feasible, even though not desirable, they seize those words and suddenly "crappy x86 with a huge HD" becomes the benchmark, and you have to JUSTIFY spending an extra grand on RAID and DAT.
And then, the next day, you're installing x86 w/ big HD and a script, because that's all you got money for.
As much as it pains me to be bitter and jaded, I agree with you.
The majority of suits get there by socializing, backstabbing, schmoozing, penny pinching, and slumming. If you can find one who got there based on their virtue, keep them around. Most, however, got there under questionable circumstances, and they'll keep behaving the same way when they're in there. You simply can't trust them until they prove otherwise.
On another note, I believe the BSA allows anonymous complaints to be filed. So if they're doing things they shouldn't, you can pass that along without affecting your future job references.
As much as I dislike external comparisons, your ideas intrigue me, and I would like to subscribe to your newsletter...
But most managers aren't. Most managers have no idea why it would take longer to install and configure Win2k Server than it does to run the Recovery Disk on their HP at home. That's why internal numbers are so much better. Having a server uptime of 99.7 as a goal, and meeting it, is easy for everyone to understand. Managers looking at a report and seeing that banks and ebay and such have 99.9, and then wondering why ours isn't the same... that's when disaster strikes.
As for job performance... again, I agree with you, people who don't want any guidelines are the ones who want to hide their incompetence. I'm happy to not be in that category. We have an internal SLA that gets lived up to, and occasionally someone pipes up and asks "Hey, how does that compare to other places?" and I give them an answer. I don't want them looking it up themselves because they don't understand the differences in situations, but I give them an honest answer, and they trust my response. If a department becomes dissatisfied, we review the SLA and change as necessary.
If I had to have a meeting every time some manager went for lunch with his buddy and found out that THEY get a visit from IT within 5 minutes of their call, to explain why that isn't going to happen here... I'd never get anything done, and equally as importantly, the frame of reference for management would change.
Right now, I have numbers to meet, and people to keep happy. If I do both, then things are good, and if someone comes in with a comparison, it's an improvement to an already good process.
If we went with constantly comparing things to outside sources, that changes the frame of comparison. Suddenly, it's "Things are better elsewhere, why aren't they better here?". And no matter how good you run things, there's always somebody doing it better, or doing it cheaper. And as much as I'd like to believe that management would go "Hey, we're running in the top 20% of all these stats, that's great, keep it up!"... too many times, I've seen them cherrypick and go "Hey, Place X is doing better than us with fewer resources... it's time to trim things up!"
I really do hate being bitter and jaded. But unfortunately, it's all deserved.
Them- "I don't understand, you said this usually only takes a day...."
Me-"Well, yes, but I also explained that when things go wrong, it can take longer, and something has gone wrong"
Them- "I don't understand what has gone wrong, but surely it can't be that bad. I expect you'll have this up and running in a few hours"
Me- "Well, I don't know the problem yet, so I can't guess at a time of repair..."
Them- "Well, if it only takes you a day to do this normally, it shouldn't take you that much longer if something goes wrong... have it up by noon".
There are variations of the conversation, but they're all the same. They don't understand what's happening or how it's done, and they apply their limited knowledge in ways that make sense in the business world, but not in the IT world. And then they get upset when it doesn't work that way. Don't let them, don't help them, don't give them any excuse [...] avoid it at all costs. And update your CV while you're doing that, cause you'll be needing it soon. I've been at my current job for going on 6 years. I have a great working agreement with my manager. He has expectations, based on internal requirements. Uptime, response time, standard SLA stuff. I either make it, or give him a reasonable reason why I didn't. He doesn't try to understand the techie stuff, he accepts my word when I tell him how long something is going to take, and if it turns out to take longer, I tell him "The -tech- in the -tech- is broken, I'll need an extra X hours to do it right", and he says "OK".
He doesn't try to benchmark me on how long it would take another person to do -tech-, he doesn't keep a frickin graph of -tech- response times and try to shoehorn me into it... I tell him how long it's going to take, and he trusts my expertise. If there's a business reason that he needs it sooner, he tells me, and we negotiate what I'm going to put on the back burner to get it done. If it simply can't be done for technical reasons, I tell him, and again, he accepts my word.
This is the way things should be. If he was comparing what I told him to a list of reports of unrelated circumstances and trying to compare them, even though he doesn't understand why they're not the same... that's just a disaster waiting to happen.
-------
Rather than quoting all the pay stuff, I'll just say that most of my experience has been with Fortune 500 companies, and they're mostly interested in the bottom line, not in paying their people well or being industry-leading. If you're doing the job they need and they can get away with paying you 10k less than average, they will. If you're getting 10k more than average, and they can get someone to come in and do it for 10k less than average, they'll do it. It's sad, and I would be very happy to be somewhere that wouldn't, but it's the way things run. Money is everything, if they can get moderately acceptable performance for a lot less money, they'll do it.
Yes, Businesses compare themselves to other Businesses. This isn't a business, this is a department in a business, a service department at that. If the services are being provided in an acceptable fashion, that's what should count.
Additionally, even when comparisons are occurring, management isn't in a position to compare. They simply don't have the expertise. They can compare sales, or throughput, or numbers, but asking them to understand that a backup server with RAID and a DAT tape drive is fundamentally different than taking an old PC, slapping a big hard drive into it, and using a scheduled batch file to xcopy everything over... well, they might as well be asking to be fundamentally involved in your selection of a heart donor.
I got a benchmark for ya. "Are things running well?" Yes? Yes they are? Then shut the fuck up and stop asking me to waste time comparing myself to other people.
(This method of managerial interaction is derived from the groundbreaking book "Shut the fuck up" by Dr Denis Leary)
Seriously, it's not an "innocent" request. It never is. First, they just want to know how you compare. Then, they want to know why you're not the absolute bestest in the whole universe. Then they compare you against departments with fewer people. "Hmm, seems we could get comparable results with 2 fewer bodies". Then each employee is evaluating their specific performance trying to justify their job. Or you're filling out "Time code sheets" to tell them what you do in each 6 minute block of time. Pretty soon you're hearing about their buddy Steve, who has his entire office and web presence run by one part time summer intern who happily works for $6/hour plus tips.
Evaluate your performance based on internal expectations. You want great uptime on the web server? Why, we were only down for 2 hours last month. Compared to previous months, that's great! You want quick response to employee problems? Our average response time for properly filed tickets was down %4 compared to last quarter. That's the way you evaluate. If you start giving these fuckers examples of how other companies are doing, they'll cherry-pick and start challenging you to match. "Why, there's a place in Wisconsin that only has 1 tech covering 400 people! I don't know what this 'Wyse terminal' thing is, but surely if just one guy can cover all those people, we're overstaffed here!"
I know it seems like it could be good. "Why, we're outperforming most other companies, surely they'll see this and use it as criteria to give us better raises/more benefits/better perks". NO. NO, they won't. Just NO. Come review time, you could be leading 90% of the field, and they'll go on about the top 10% and how those guys earn less than you, so they shouldn't give you a raise. Or they'll go on about how other companies have their helpdesk techs do server support too, so they don't need your $80k server admin. If you're underpaid, and everyone else makes more than you, you can show them that too, and they'll nod in an interested fashion, they'll hum and haw, and they'll end up giving you some bullshit excuse about budget constraints. If you make more than other people, expect a pay freeze or cut. Even if fall in the middle of the bell curve, expect them to find a reason to lump you with the folks on the bottom of the curve.
Management doesn't understand you or what you do. They're scared of you. They want to control you and marginalize you so they can eliminate you. Don't let them, don't help them, don't give them any excuse. No matter how much you train them, or explain to them, or draw them little fucking flowcharts in Visio with pretty colours, what you do is still voodoo to them. You push keys on the magic box, typing 10x faster than they can, and you get it to do things they couldn't even dream of, and you do it really easily, and that makes them feel dumb. And just like stupid bullies on the playground, they want to get back at you, subconciously perhaps, but they still do. They want to sit there across from you, at their big fancy desks in their spotless shiny offices, because that's their one time to feel superior to you, to be in control of you, unlike all the other times when you're the magician who just makes miracles happen.
Don't fall for it. Rephrase their request, turn it around on them, avoid it at all costs. Does your accounting department have to compare themselves to other businesses? Do your managers have to go around finding out how other managers in other companies are doing? Fuck no. Don't let them treat you any different than any other department. They're just doing this because they don't understand what you do. Don't explain it to them, just give them numbers based on internal statistics so they can sit back and go "phew, IT is performing well, I'm happy".
Just remember folks, any time anyone in management opens their mouth, echo these words in your head:
"It's a trap!"
I enjoy fragging some chump as much as anyone else, but if they lost money every time I got a good shot in, I'd actually start to feel bad after a few shots.
... glitch... (not a hack, not really a cheat, just a bit of a glitch), expected to only use it once or twice before people clued in and stayed out of that room, and instead I got this chump (or chumpette) who just went batty that I kept headshotting them when I couldn't see them. I laughed my ass off, so did my friend, so did most of the other people playing.
:)
Quick story: A few years ago, was playing Quake 3, Weapons Factory Arena mod, at a friends place. I discovered that when you turned on Player Name Labels, if you passed your crosshairs over an area that you could shoot through but couldn't see through (like a curtain over a window), the player name would pop up when you went over them, even though you couldn't actually see them.
So, I did what any good sniper would do. I found a hole to hide in, pointed my gun at the window, and waited for labels to start popping up. A few shots later I had the exact height for headshots.
Some chucklehead started running in there. I shot him. He ran back. I shot him again. He tried to sneak back in. I shot him again. All headshots. He started doing nothing but running from the spawn point to this room, trying to find a way to avoid me. He'd duck, he'd run back and forth, he'd bunnyjump. All the while he was cursing me, accusing me of cheating, and going completely rabid and foamy-mouth. I must have headshotted him 50 times before the timer ran out.
I thought it was hilarious. I'd found a small
Now, if he lost a buck every time I nailed him... I'd really feel bad. Sure, it's his fault, but still, $50 lost and you don't understand how you lost it? That would suck.
Also brings to mind the old Descent days. We used to play v1 multiplayer in the university LAN. It was awesome 8 of us rippin it up. Thanks to my ability to think 3D (vs most of the other guys who all thought in terms of "flat"), I was the resident sniper, hanging nose down over doorways with homing missiles ready, jumping out of pits or corners in the ceiling, and of course, hiding out while they all fought, and then wiping out the winner.
All perfectly acceptable in a winner-take-all game for fun. But if I mega-missile someone up the ass because they went blasting through a doorway without looking, and then nail everyone who comes for their loot, and then nail the respawns who come looking for a powerup... well, it just doesn't sound as fun when there's serious money to be lost for everyone.
We've all had those days when we just can't accept that we're losing, and we have to keep trying (I did that yesterday in WoW... stupid spider queen). And while that's all fine when it's for fun, or when there's a 1-time bet on it... if you suddenly have a crappy night and are $200 in the hole because of it... I just wouldn't want to be the cause of that. Whether they deserved it or not.
Yeah, screw Digg! Those bastards, censoring shit, trying to hide things, giving in to "The Man" and the fear of legal battles. Fuck them! Slashdot rules!
Hey, on a completely unrelated note, can anyone point me to that copy of book 3 of Scientology that was posted here a few years back?
kthnx.
Just like "It's not the fall that kills you, it's the sudden stop at the end."
Or my favourite:
Q: "Did you hear?? Johnny fell 20 stories and LIVED!"
A: "Really? That's amazing!"
Q: "Yeah, unfortunately it was off a 21 story building..."