Minimum wage is not a job killer nor is it useful. Over the very short term business lose profit which might slow growth but it does not cost jobs just fails to create new ones. Over a slightly longer term they as you say fire an employee, institute a more permenant slower hireing policy or find ways to pass costs on; or get more output from the current labor pool.
Over the long term those costs do get passed on or the government prints some money to give aways as handouts to displaced works. Its inflationary and that $8.25 only buys what the $5.25 of yesteryears minimum wage bought.
The fact is the clean air act has proably done more to put more carbon in the air than anything. C02 was not considered to be the threat it is today when the law was writen, add CAFEE Standards to this and we get the disaster that is the present day American Autombile fleet. We would all be driving cars that are more powerful than we have today getting 50+MPG right now if it was not for those stupid laws. The irration fear of things like NOx has prevented the development of high compression high efficencies engines for consumer applications.
Detroit knows and knew perfectly how to build high out put high efficency engines, and the manfacturing technology was just about getting to where it would be cheap, and then the government came along and told them to stop. Consequently we import much more oil, and burn much more of it setting loose much more carbon.
Right and decent banking sites don't use those for password recovery questions. They use them for an additional check each time you logon; they usually have you answer a number of questions when you setup your online access and challenge you with one in a semi-random fashion using a window of time as the seed so an attacker can't just try again in hopes of getting a question he can answer right away; he will have to wait an hour or something.
They usually lock your account pretty quickly two or three tries for bad password or bad answers. To get it unlocked / recover your password you usually call customer service and they ask you for a number of things most attackers should not know like, the full account number, the last X transactions for the previous months statement, your SS number.
Don't forget the value of all the answers for to factor authentication as well. Lots of banking sites and stuff will after you enter your password/username pair correctly also ask you something like, what is your mothers maiden name, or What is your favorite kind of car, or what elementary school did you attend, etc etc. All things that someone with access to your facebook account might have a very good shot at knowing.
In my experience they only affordable have those types of connect speeds if you are planing to collocate one of the big Telco's local POPs. Generally here in the States for commercial applications anything over 10M can be delivered to you as an Ethernet handoff. Usually that is getting out to the site as some number of bonded DS3 or DS12 circuits. There are therefore some economic considerations. If the speed you want happens to be something that results from a smallish multiple of DS3s or DS1s say 1-3 its usually cheaper to terminate them yourself. If you want something odd like 10M then they are going to want to bring it into your site as 7DS1 loops or something obscene like that; in which case the equipment you'd need to aggregated all those serial loops starts to get really expensive compared to the very low lease fee on whatever strange device the telco has which will turn it into Ethernet for you.
if we hate them and fight them, or are just too arrogant about preferring our own ways, we'll die, just like Geronimo and Boudica did.
Or you know we might also win. Like how the British Empire defeated Napoleonic France, The Allies defeated the Axis powers, and so on. You might have a point, in that electing not to fight means you are most likely to get to go on; but if you live by the sword or die by the sword sometimes you do live.
The corrective action would involved installation of a dividing plate, however they measured the probability of occurence, the amount of potential losses in litigation, and the costs involved and decided that it just wasn't worth doing a recall.
Faulting Ford for that is the sort of weak minded thinking that is destroying western civilization. There analysis was perfectly correct and their action perfectly justified. They determined that the likelihood of the event happening was low and were prepared to accept the consequences if it did. Very simple risk reward. You probably do it every day yourself. What is the likelihood you will be hurt or killed using an automobile to get to work each day, what about hurting or killing someone else? I bet you do it though; the rewards of work opportunity afforded to you by the mobility the car provides justify the risk for you. This is how humans think, and if we are going to dump all over each other for being human our society is doomed.
Even more simply, calculate the cost of personal luxuries against the amount of donations needed to save a human life somewhere in the world. My American dollars can stretch pretty far in those desperate countries.
That is only true because there are few dollars in those places and you know it. Money is a scarcity thing if everyone sent every disposable dollar they had to those places those dollars would buy no more there than they do here. Money facilitates economic activity it does not create it.
And all because you couldn't see past your own need for complexity to keep you mentally entertained while you cranked out yet another for loop (and didn't develop the languages that had the for loops internalized so you could map functions onto collections without a bunch of hideous repetitive syntax, anyhow).
Really seems to me every modern OO language does this right back to C++. Its called a class. In C++ you need to define it; and in other languages you would inherit/extend whatever collection object exists. Anything with BASIC, shell, or COBOL in its heritage probably has a FOREACH $object IN $collection DO SOMETHING($object) or similar syntax; which is a one liner. Unless all the functions are know ahead of time you are going to have to perform that mapping somewhere but its done and its done all the time.
Right and the current mode of IT is 100 users plus per system administrator. (S)[Hh]e does not have time to do that if you expect them to test every DAT file.
I think there is more truth in what you say than most care to admint; but your statement is a bit crass. As Christian I am well aware that we have as group have done many things in the Christ's name which are inexcusebly un-Christian. Most Christians are peaceful and most Muslims probably are as well. Where the whole thing breaks down as far as the defense of Islam goes is that their early history is characterized by violoence.
Mohammed was a violent concourer that is just historical fact. Jesus never got beyond the minor destruction of property and there is only one record even of that. The Quaran does specifiy violent remedies for any number of situations where the Bibible taken as whole work with the New Testament taken to have supreemacy (as Christians do) does not. These are facts they are. Its therefore true that an Islamic fundamentalist is a supporter of violenece.
The TFA issue though IMHO is not a religious matter at all but a secular one, which is resolved and should therefore not command the attention it gets at all. We have freedome of speech in the US and freedom of religion. Islamists are free to practice their rule about not portraying the profit, but everyone else has the abosult right to do so. This is one of the basic principles of our society and it must be defended for the sake of our democracy. I am sure most everyone agrees on this point. I think all sinsationalizing the issue with media attention does is lend credibility to the Islamist argument; which at least in the United States is a dog that wont hunt.
Well you mostly just restated the TFA. I don't care what the tool is. I am simply saying you can't possibly as a user know what all is bad, so you must instead identify what is good. The current tools are geared toward that end, at least partly, but in an effort to make things less archane they already have severly compromised the strength of most firewalls in general because they steer the user away from listing out every detail and use blanket policy like "trust any internal".
There is the very fundamental problem here that the computer can't know what is or is not malicous. Oh sure there are patterns it can watch for but there will be exceptions to those. While I agree that inputing the information should be as simple as possible; I think determining what the rules should be in the first place will always require some careful thought. I am not sure you can make that part of the job easier with a machine. At some point YOU have to be the one deciding: who you are going to communicate with, using what protocol, when you are going to do it, for how long, which side is going to start communication, etc. These are not simple decisions, even if the data entry for them could be.
They all follow that paradigm because they "correctly" assume that you cannot enumerate badness. Sense you cannot create a comprehensive list of all possible attacks and exploits to block you must instead enumerate all the know flows you want to permit.
Most firewalls are WAY TO PERMISSIVE to be of much practical benefit. They typical home firewall to this day assumes that traffic from the internal network should be trusted. THIS IS DEEPLY FALSE. Look its bad if you get botnet software installed on your box, but its only really bad if it can actually call home and participate in the botnet. Auto configure like UPNP means the firewall might as well not even be there; once something bad gets in UPNP will certainly let it out.
Most people think about firewalls from the wrong direction; sure you want to close off the ports to certain services which you might run for use internally on your network; these are few and should be easy to take care of. Its also not hard to get any major OS to tell you what listening sockets exists; no listener no risk firewall or not. The typical single home PC probably should have very few thins listening expect on lo; and the expeptions should be easy to find. Its the calling out that is real concern that most home systems don't address at all.
IRC should be block out ecept to the networks you use; http/https probably blocked except to a few major corporate networks and your home country, same for ftp, ssh, you name it. Yea its a pain but its what you need to do. THe things you know about good or bad are not the threat its the things you don't know about that are; and the only safe way to address that is default deny; there is not changing that.
I would be prepared to argue that you make page 874 of the tax code part of your art though. A urinal is not art but Marcel DuChamp certainly had one contribute greatly to his "Fountain."
Or you know you could just get a cheap one way car rental from any of our many nation wide chains and use our highways which btw are some of the best in the world. You could leave when you want stop and rest when you like, stop any place that looks interesting etc etc. Download a book on tape to your MP3 player and hit the pavement man. When it comes to long distance interstate travel and you have time to do anything other than fly the car on a US highway beats any train, bus, subway, etc hands down!
Exactly the issue is not that tools are not cross platform or that the iphone is not compatibile with the Mac; that is not really surprising. The problem is Apple marketing said they were, when they are not. Its like Microsofts claim.Net is cross platform; sounds nice but lets be honest..Net runs on what Windows or Windows x64. A small subset of what is considered "platform" on Windows is there for use on Windows Mobile; such that unless your app is trivial you are probably looking at a serious porting effort; and we all know you are not going run your.Net application at all on Big non x86 UNIX, Mainframes of any kind or embeded devices not running Windows Mobile. These are all places Java(much as I am not a fan) can go with very little porting effort which makes the claim.Net is cross platform appear pretty crazy.
VMWare could do what you want and give you multiple displays. If you do go that route make ubuntu the host and windows the guest. It works much better that way in my experience than the other way around. My guestion is are the same people using both ubuntu and Windows?
If the answer is no than virtualization is probably not what you need. Unless you are using some very very exotic hardware you should be able to put together an ubuntu image that will deploy on just about any system; with very little trouble. There are plenty of documents on doing that.
Windows Deployment Services and WAIK, will also let you build a very generic Windows Seven image; to which you can easily add the drivers for the specific platform prior to deployment. It adds it all very cleanly so you don't get the mess of registry cruft you did in the past trying to deploy a ghost image or something and fix the drivers after. Its totally different situation than it was five yeas ago if you have not kept up. We use the same core WIM image on five different model laptops for different OEMs, a couple desktops, and even a tablet with no problems.
Yes and those were at least back then mostly powered by ICE, which would have had air filters (even if just a bit of cloth) and don't depend on fragile, fine turbine blades cranking at 10K rpm; but instead had relatively robust pistons of steel and iron. Dust will harm and ICE but it causes premature ware one pistons, rings, liners, values, guides, and any thing else being lubes from a common oil sump where dust might get into the oil (also filtered during operation). A Jet is a little or turbo prop is a little different beast then the that old barn storming Jenny.
The issues here also have to do with melting, heat of crystallization, size of openings where the fuel injectors are concerned, durability of the turbofans etc etc. I can easily imagine the characteristics of one engine making it suffer much less harm than another of even slightly different design. What I can't imagine is figuring out which ones would fall into which category based on the information we have.
They really should: 1. Do more out of band communication; e-mail being virtually impossible to verify is not a good medium to confirm who you are dealing with.
2. They should probably use the contact on the domain registration period. Most of them accept any number of alternate mail address that might or might not be protected. root@doamin, hostmaster@domain, ssladmin@domain, administrator@domain, postmaster@domain, and so forth. This is the exploit done in the TFA.
Its not hypocrisy at all but a cleaver response. The GPL was originally created because RMS felt that the way software was being produced, sold, and controlled with licensing, patents, and copyright was not good for people, the economy, and especially the general principle of freedom.
He and others first lobbied to try and get the rules changed, many continue that effort. In the mean time he did the next best thing. He co-opted the rules and created a license that preserves things he felt were important that others were using the same rules to take away. He then put in lots of effort to ensure there would be a concentration of value protected by that license such that others would want to access it. The four freedoms would for the most part exist in the natural state; that is a world free of patents, and copyright. You might not always have the source to something you bought but it would be a pretty tough world to sell software in competitively without offering the code. So what the GPL is really designed to do is say, look we don't think the system should work this way and that there should be these rules but ok if you get to use them than so can we. If you don't like it than you have to adopt our position that the copyright and patent system at least where software is concerned is broken and throw out your rules. were using the same rules to take away. Most of the freedoms would probably exist
What is might do is limit exposure. Suppose someone guesses a password. They are not a hacker and even having guess a password they perhaps lack priviliges to make any systemic changes given them a back door. Having a rotation policy ensures they are only reading your CEO's e-mail for 90 days rather than years undetected.
Slashdot Mirror
Minimum wage is not a job killer nor is it useful. Over the very short term business lose profit which might slow growth but it does not cost jobs just fails to create new ones. Over a slightly longer term they as you say fire an employee, institute a more permenant slower hireing policy or find ways to pass costs on; or get more output from the current labor pool.
Over the long term those costs do get passed on or the government prints some money to give aways as handouts to displaced works. Its inflationary and that $8.25 only buys what the $5.25 of yesteryears minimum wage bought.
The fact is the clean air act has proably done more to put more carbon in the air than anything. C02 was not considered to be the threat it is today when the law was writen, add CAFEE Standards to this and we get the disaster that is the present day American Autombile fleet. We would all be driving cars that are more powerful than we have today getting 50+MPG right now if it was not for those stupid laws. The irration fear of things like NOx has prevented the development of high compression high efficencies engines for consumer applications.
Detroit knows and knew perfectly how to build high out put high efficency engines, and the manfacturing technology was just about getting to where it would be cheap, and then the government came along and told them to stop. Consequently we import much more oil, and burn much more of it setting loose much more carbon.
Right and decent banking sites don't use those for password recovery questions. They use them for an additional check each time you logon; they usually have you answer a number of questions when you setup your online access and challenge you with one in a semi-random fashion using a window of time as the seed so an attacker can't just try again in hopes of getting a question he can answer right away; he will have to wait an hour or something.
They usually lock your account pretty quickly two or three tries for bad password or bad answers. To get it unlocked / recover your password you usually call customer service and they ask you for a number of things most attackers should not know like, the full account number, the last X transactions for the previous months statement, your SS number.
Don't forget the value of all the answers for to factor authentication as well. Lots of banking sites and stuff will after you enter your password/username pair correctly also ask you something like, what is your mothers maiden name, or What is your favorite kind of car, or what elementary school did you attend, etc etc. All things that someone with access to your facebook account might have a very good shot at knowing.
I am pretty sure Facebook was going to enable "post-on-behalf-of" for everyone on their next privacy settings revision anyway for extra fun.
Make sure you get the right supervisor module with that it its not going route any 1Gbps either.
In my experience they only affordable have those types of connect speeds if you are planing to collocate one of the big Telco's local POPs. Generally here in the States for commercial applications anything over 10M can be delivered to you as an Ethernet handoff. Usually that is getting out to the site as some number of bonded DS3 or DS12 circuits. There are therefore some economic considerations. If the speed you want happens to be something that results from a smallish multiple of DS3s or DS1s say 1-3 its usually cheaper to terminate them yourself. If you want something odd like 10M then they are going to want to bring it into your site as 7DS1 loops or something obscene like that; in which case the equipment you'd need to aggregated all those serial loops starts to get really expensive compared to the very low lease fee on whatever strange device the telco has which will turn it into Ethernet for you.
if we hate them and fight them, or are just too arrogant about preferring our own ways, we'll die, just like Geronimo and Boudica did.
Or you know we might also win. Like how the British Empire defeated Napoleonic France, The Allies defeated the Axis powers, and so on. You might have a point, in that electing not to fight means you are most likely to get to go on; but if you live by the sword or die by the sword sometimes you do live.
The corrective action would involved installation of a dividing plate, however they measured the probability of occurence, the amount of potential losses in litigation, and the costs involved and decided that it just wasn't worth doing a recall.
Faulting Ford for that is the sort of weak minded thinking that is destroying western civilization. There analysis was perfectly correct and their action perfectly justified. They determined that the likelihood of the event happening was low and were prepared to accept the consequences if it did. Very simple risk reward. You probably do it every day yourself. What is the likelihood you will be hurt or killed using an automobile to get to work each day, what about hurting or killing someone else? I bet you do it though; the rewards of work opportunity afforded to you by the mobility the car provides justify the risk for you. This is how humans think, and if we are going to dump all over each other for being human our society is doomed.
Even more simply, calculate the cost of personal luxuries against the amount of donations needed to save a human life somewhere in the world. My American dollars can stretch pretty far in those desperate countries.
That is only true because there are few dollars in those places and you know it. Money is a scarcity thing if everyone sent every disposable dollar they had to those places those dollars would buy no more there than they do here. Money facilitates economic activity it does not create it.
And all because you couldn't see past your own need for complexity to keep you mentally entertained while you cranked out yet another for loop (and didn't develop the languages that had the for loops internalized so you could map functions onto collections without a bunch of hideous repetitive syntax, anyhow).
Really seems to me every modern OO language does this right back to C++. Its called a class. In C++ you need to define it; and in other languages you would inherit/extend whatever collection object exists. Anything with BASIC, shell, or COBOL in its heritage probably has a FOREACH $object IN $collection DO SOMETHING($object) or similar syntax; which is a one liner. Unless all the functions are know ahead of time you are going to have to perform that mapping somewhere but its done and its done all the time.
I think it puts HULU more against Netflix than ITMS.
Right and the current mode of IT is 100 users plus per system administrator. (S)[Hh]e does not have time to do that if you expect them to test every DAT file.
Focibly violating someones body to install a microchip is a nonviolent crime? I think you should re-examine your how you have defined violence.
I think there is more truth in what you say than most care to admint; but your statement is a bit crass. As Christian I am well aware that we have as group have done many things in the Christ's name which are inexcusebly un-Christian. Most Christians are peaceful and most Muslims probably are as well. Where the whole thing breaks down as far as the defense of Islam goes is that their early history is characterized by violoence.
Mohammed was a violent concourer that is just historical fact. Jesus never got beyond the minor destruction of property and there is only one record even of that. The Quaran does specifiy violent remedies for any number of situations where the Bibible taken as whole work with the New Testament taken to have supreemacy (as Christians do) does not. These are facts they are. Its therefore true that an Islamic fundamentalist is a supporter of violenece.
The TFA issue though IMHO is not a religious matter at all but a secular one, which is resolved and should therefore not command the attention it gets at all. We have freedome of speech in the US and freedom of religion. Islamists are free to practice their rule about not portraying the profit, but everyone else has the abosult right to do so. This is one of the basic principles of our society and it must be defended for the sake of our democracy. I am sure most everyone agrees on this point. I think all sinsationalizing the issue with media attention does is lend credibility to the Islamist argument; which at least in the United States is a dog that wont hunt.
Well you mostly just restated the TFA. I don't care what the tool is. I am simply saying you can't possibly as a user know what all is bad, so you must instead identify what is good. The current tools are geared toward that end, at least partly, but in an effort to make things less archane they already have severly compromised the strength of most firewalls in general because they steer the user away from listing out every detail and use blanket policy like "trust any internal".
There is the very fundamental problem here that the computer can't know what is or is not malicous. Oh sure there are patterns it can watch for but there will be exceptions to those. While I agree that inputing the information should be as simple as possible; I think determining what the rules should be in the first place will always require some careful thought. I am not sure you can make that part of the job easier with a machine. At some point YOU have to be the one deciding: who you are going to communicate with, using what protocol, when you are going to do it, for how long, which side is going to start communication, etc. These are not simple decisions, even if the data entry for them could be.
They all follow that paradigm because they "correctly" assume that you cannot enumerate badness. Sense you cannot create a comprehensive list of all possible attacks and exploits to block you must instead enumerate all the know flows you want to permit.
Most firewalls are WAY TO PERMISSIVE to be of much practical benefit. They typical home firewall to this day assumes that traffic from the internal network should be trusted. THIS IS DEEPLY FALSE. Look its bad if you get botnet software installed on your box, but its only really bad if it can actually call home and participate in the botnet. Auto configure like UPNP means the firewall might as well not even be there; once something bad gets in UPNP will certainly let it out.
Most people think about firewalls from the wrong direction; sure you want to close off the ports to certain services which you might run for use internally on your network; these are few and should be easy to take care of. Its also not hard to get any major OS to tell you what listening sockets exists; no listener no risk firewall or not. The typical single home PC probably should have very few thins listening expect on lo; and the expeptions should be easy to find. Its the calling out that is real concern that most home systems don't address at all.
IRC should be block out ecept to the networks you use; http/https probably blocked except to a few major corporate networks and your home country, same for ftp, ssh, you name it. Yea its a pain but its what you need to do. THe things you know about good or bad are not the threat its the things you don't know about that are; and the only safe way to address that is default deny; there is not changing that.
I would be prepared to argue that you make page 874 of the tax code part of your art though. A urinal is not art but Marcel DuChamp certainly had one contribute greatly to his "Fountain."
Or you know you could just get a cheap one way car rental from any of our many nation wide chains and use our highways which btw are some of the best in the world. You could leave when you want stop and rest when you like, stop any place that looks interesting etc etc. Download a book on tape to your MP3 player and hit the pavement man. When it comes to long distance interstate travel and you have time to do anything other than fly the car on a US highway beats any train, bus, subway, etc hands down!
Exactly the issue is not that tools are not cross platform or that the iphone is not compatibile with the Mac; that is not really surprising. The problem is Apple marketing said they were, when they are not. Its like Microsofts claim .Net is cross platform; sounds nice but lets be honest. .Net runs on what Windows or Windows x64. A small subset of what is considered "platform" on Windows is there for use on Windows Mobile; such that unless your app is trivial you are probably looking at a serious porting effort; and we all know you are not going run your .Net application at all on Big non x86 UNIX, Mainframes of any kind or embeded devices not running Windows Mobile. These are all places Java(much as I am not a fan) can go with very little porting effort which makes the claim .Net is cross platform appear pretty crazy.
VMWare could do what you want and give you multiple displays. If you do go that route make ubuntu the host and windows the guest. It works much better that way in my experience than the other way around. My guestion is are the same people using both ubuntu and Windows?
If the answer is no than virtualization is probably not what you need. Unless you are using some very very exotic hardware you should be able to put together an ubuntu image that will deploy on just about any system; with very little trouble. There are plenty of documents on doing that.
Windows Deployment Services and WAIK, will also let you build a very generic Windows Seven image; to which you can easily add the drivers for the specific platform prior to deployment. It adds it all very cleanly so you don't get the mess of registry cruft you did in the past trying to deploy a ghost image or something and fix the drivers after. Its totally different situation than it was five yeas ago if you have not kept up. We use the same core WIM image on five different model laptops for different OEMs, a couple desktops, and even a tablet with no problems.
Yes and those were at least back then mostly powered by ICE, which would have had air filters (even if just a bit of cloth) and don't depend on fragile, fine turbine blades cranking at 10K rpm; but instead had relatively robust pistons of steel and iron. Dust will harm and ICE but it causes premature ware one pistons, rings, liners, values, guides, and any thing else being lubes from a common oil sump where dust might get into the oil (also filtered during operation). A Jet is a little or turbo prop is a little different beast then the that old barn storming Jenny.
The issues here also have to do with melting, heat of crystallization, size of openings where the fuel injectors are concerned, durability of the turbofans etc etc. I can easily imagine the characteristics of one engine making it suffer much less harm than another of even slightly different design. What I can't imagine is figuring out which ones would fall into which category based on the information we have.
They really should:
1. Do more out of band communication; e-mail being virtually impossible to verify is not a good medium to confirm who you are dealing with.
2. They should probably use the contact on the domain registration period. Most of them accept any number of alternate mail address that might or might not be protected. root@doamin, hostmaster@domain, ssladmin@domain, administrator@domain, postmaster@domain, and so forth. This is the exploit done in the TFA.
Its not hypocrisy at all but a cleaver response. The GPL was originally created because RMS felt that the way software was being produced, sold, and controlled with licensing, patents, and copyright was not good for people, the economy, and especially the general principle of freedom.
He and others first lobbied to try and get the rules changed, many continue that effort. In the mean time he did the next best thing. He co-opted the rules and created a license that preserves things he felt were important that others were using the same rules to take away. He then put in lots of effort to ensure there would be a concentration of value protected by that license such that others would want to access it. The four freedoms would for the most part exist in the natural state; that is a world free of patents, and copyright. You might not always have the source to something you bought but it would be a pretty tough world to sell software in competitively without offering the code.
So what the GPL is really designed to do is say, look we don't think the system should work this way and that there should be these rules but ok if you get to use them than so can we. If you don't like it than you have to adopt our position that the copyright and patent system at least where software is concerned is broken and throw out your rules.
were using the same rules to take away. Most of the freedoms would probably exist
What is might do is limit exposure. Suppose someone guesses a password. They are not a hacker and even having guess a password they perhaps lack priviliges to make any systemic changes given them a back door. Having a rotation policy ensures they are only reading your CEO's e-mail for 90 days rather than years undetected.