Whisper quiet? Can high-performance PC's be made utterly dead quiet? I'd think the military might be interested, and they do have a history of supporting proven but expensive and obsolete computers* (as this would likely be in a few years). They're also resilient toward restraints on materials that are non-green. Submarines, stealth equipment of all sorts, there is a place for high performance dead-quiet gear.
*The aiming computers on US battleships are a good example. They're analog, old, expensive, and they work. Of course "quiet" is not really a requirement there -- you're stone deaf if you work in that operational environment for very long.
It's not the data, it's the context. Name, address and phone number for most people is not a problem to divulge (except for those who consider the White Pages in the phone book a threat). Name, address and phone number on a list of people who carry strategic defense codes around in a briefcase handcuffed to their wrist, however, might be.
Conceptually correct, perhaps. But I remember reading a wealthy auto journalist's view to the contrary some time ago; he reported that after returning from a long trip to Europe, the Ferrari was the only exotic in his stable that would start right away.
I'm not given the resources to cover any and all bases though so I make security the priority at deployment time, if my deadline gets brought forward significantly which happens from time to time some of my testing might go by the wayside
The problem, then, is you're an individual human, qty(1), who can't cover all the bases simply because there are too many bases.
At the board room, it's all about calculated risk (in a competent board room, anyway). I remember hearing a representative from a school bus company talking about pupil security a long time ago. He said we could build the school buses as secure as the customers like; if they wanted to stop a wire-guided missile, they could probably put enough armour on it to do so. Of course, nobody would buy it...
The point here is that there is only so much armour plate you can put into an IT infrastructure. Beyond the threshold of silly, you just need to stop, check that your security efforts have been to the level you specified, then find and prosecute the intruders or write off the loss.
The down side is that you're only human. The up side is that your intruders are, too.
I think it is entirely appropriate to investigate a company when large ammounts of personal information ends up being 'stolen'
I agree, and there should be penalties for egregious misuse of data placed in one's trust.
I do hope, however, that there should be some limit on the liability of IT professionals who do their best to prevent disclosure, but who are either one step behind the black hats or overworked to the point where technical oversight and coverage of the systems in their care is compromised. This isn't just a bleeding heart beating here, I'm worried that overall IT security will suffer if good engineers and sysadmins are frightened away from the security field by the spectre of personal liability. Fewer people in IT security == epic fail.
Although I read (and enjoyed) most of Bradbury's work, I never considered him a mainstream science fiction writer. His very best work was horror, of the type that involved the suggestion of hot, pressured humid days before a storm, a lightning rod salesman, and the implied certainty of damnation from the combination. He's a prose writer with the soul of a poet.
I see SF as a story where the world, and behaviour, has changed as a result of some technical progress, whether or not that technology is explained. Bradbury, to his credit, did have the world changed because of technology, and didn't explain it at all -- just the effect. This was not Doc Smith's footnotes on corpuscular drive and space suits of phenoline and bakelite. Both had their place.
A programmer should be able to just tell the artist. You need to work together - not fighting!
Goody goody gosh. Although you come across as a Care Bear there, you've got it damned straight. But sometimes the fight begins, is carried out and ends in a single individual's mind. It's not always PvP. An individual has to believe both sides of the fight are accomplishable within themselves.
In Australia (in the University of Victoria, anyway) the degree for Multimedia Design merges art and software by teaching logical discipline to artists, using modern tools such as Maya and Flash et.al. so that this new medium can contain the incredible pool of talent available to fill it.
There are very creative people around, and very logical people around, and every day I become more convinced that a knowledge and talent at art does not preclude logical thinking, and that logical thinking does not preclude one from having the gift of imagination.
I suppose it all starts with that: Imagination, and passion. You have to permit yourself enough emotional attachment to your dreams to want to make something beautiful, fun, and involving. Then, to realise that there are tools and disciplines that can take you from dream to expression, and a willingness to fight through the angst until you accomplish something. Sometimes the fight means working twice as hard for twice as long, but I know it can be done, I've seen the results and so have you. Make the effort to be brilliant, guys, it's worth it.
If you've punched code out on 80 column punched cards
Or perhaps if you used an AM radio over the memory register to help you debug a program, or built an oscilloscope because it would help you as a programmer, because some computers required knowing the state of certain circuits by their square waves.
Nah, I've gone to the dark side. They have chocolate. Just hit "Revered" with Shattered Sun Offensive, think I'll stick with WoW for a little longer. Maybe not as shiny in places, but at least I don't wake up inside a rock. And I don't blame EQ mentality, really, it was a brilliant game for its day.
Not necessarily true. "Deliverables" are often based on very real goals, especially in investment banking. Sometimes a deliverable is a hard deadline, such as "must be able to report interest earned on portfolio by (date) or you will face fines from taxation authority". That's hardly a subjective goal.
I hope Warhammer is a little careful about the bug levels at release. The level of adoption of say, Vanguard, was deeply crippled, despite the high resolution landscape and graphics, by too many incidents of falling through the world or waking up inside a rock. If people get browned by frustrating play dynamics, simply moving around, there will never be enough revenue in subscriptions to allow it to grow past that point. Sometimes it's worth waiting to get it right.
Of course, there are a lot of ways to fail, but -- a game has to be relatively bug-free or it isn't immersive. You want customers to shout "more content!", not "fix the bugs!". The former you can handle, the latter will kill you without hope of rez.
Horses for courses, of courses. I'm running on XP Pro here on the work laptop, and it doesn't take all that long to bring up the desktop, as you say. But there is this annoying and significant pause before you can do anything while XP pre-fetches your taskbar program headers or whatever it is that it does. That takes longer, and you're never entirely sure when full functionality going to arrive (Measure it? Meh, it's a laptop). That indefinite pause after you see the start button is enough to push the boot up to close to a minute or so on my Latitude D620. That minute is nothing at the office when I have a coffee machine to load, but when I'm at the airport or in a meeting I'd really prefer to trim as many seconds as I can; subjectively 10 seconds is a long time when you're in a hurry. So I see this as potentially very valuable to me. YMMV.
Not really that odd, I think. This BIOS offshoot mini-OS is actually useful technology, and it's doing an end-around Microsoft by giving you a useful set of programs you can launch before you boot the full OS. I had a look at it just yesterday, from a reference I saw on Groklaw.
Basically it's an instant-boot into something and instant-on can give a laptop some credibility where it didn't before, i.e In A Hurry. (Stop gloating you non-Windows users, this isn't about you!) Drag that work laptop to the airport and check your mail via the web before it's time to show the security guy the holes in your socks. Sometimes the web is all you need, or Skype, and some companies issue laptops for their consultants but not Blackberries or other decent PDA.
This gives you a chance to do something with a company-approved laptop SOE that doesn't involve waking the slow, cranky and belligerant dragon that is Vista or XP Pro. This Is A Good Thing. Oh, and you can push a button on the screen that boots Windows if you need to read the boss' Powerpoint. If you have the time, that is. Takes a while to wake the dragon.
The reason why they can do this is they are a specific hardware company (ASUS the example I know) who don't have to cater to all forms of hardware -- just their own. Full-cut OS' can't be that inflexible. So it's a quick little trip from the BIOS to a v.fast PDA screentop. Most of what I need is on that little thing, for the rest you press your OS button and load your standard desktop.
"You wouldn't steal a car..." No, I wouldn't.. but if a friend asked, "Hey I got a new (insert cool car here), want me to burn you a copy?" I might think about it.
Not an impossible technology direction. Look up "material deposition" or "fabbers" that are effectively 3-dimensional printers (Ennex is one firm I remember with a web site) used in building complex prototypes used for manufacturing. Then slide the thumb widget that makes the calendar pages fly until we transition from Anno Domini to Star Date.
We can make very complex parts this way today, and some fairly complex machines are possible using this technique. Having a friend lend you a copy of a whole-car file may just be possible in the forseeable future.
Of course, it might also net you a lawsuit from the AIAA as well. Your mileage may vary.
I remember being deposed several times on the same set of questions by both sides of a civil case, during a suit about an auto accident long long ago. I remember the kick I got out of being absolutely consistent on a couple of points. For example, it was very clear to me that it annoyed the deposers no end when I said the car in front and the car behind were simultaneous impacts, and never changed my story by so much as a single adverb (it's an honest account btw). Schadenfreude, I guess. Of course it was a little like having fun at gunpoint, but sometimes you have to take your humour where you find it.
Come to Australia, mate. I have a hibiscus that wants that title. Last time I gave it an audit it was in the process of taking over a sheep station in the far north of Queensland.
String theory posits that there are actually 11 (or 12?) dimensions, of which only 4 are "uncoiled" at any given time. In our "universe" those 4 are the three physical dimensions (length, width, height) and time.
Taken 4 at a time you come out with something like 8000 different "universes", each with their own physical laws.
Mygawd, the universe is a browser, and the strings are hyperlinks. That would explain the validity of FSM as a causative agent.
Yessss, Oil is black and sweet. (Aaaahh the Sun! We hates it, my precious! We hates it!)
On a slightly less silly note, I like this development. And wierd body plans suit the laboratory environment quite well.
I imagine we could move away from the great black poison in the dirt eventually, if our good wierdly-planned bodies in the laboratory keep up the good work.
Slashdot Mirror
*The aiming computers on US battleships are a good example. They're analog, old, expensive, and they work. Of course "quiet" is not really a requirement there -- you're stone deaf if you work in that operational environment for very long.
It's not the data, it's the context. Name, address and phone number for most people is not a problem to divulge (except for those who consider the White Pages in the phone book a threat). Name, address and phone number on a list of people who carry strategic defense codes around in a briefcase handcuffed to their wrist, however, might be.
Conceptually correct, perhaps. But I remember reading a wealthy auto journalist's view to the contrary some time ago; he reported that after returning from a long trip to Europe, the Ferrari was the only exotic in his stable that would start right away.
I'm not given the resources to cover any and all bases though so I make security the priority at deployment time, if my deadline gets brought forward significantly which happens from time to time some of my testing might go by the wayside
The problem, then, is you're an individual human, qty(1), who can't cover all the bases simply because there are too many bases.
At the board room, it's all about calculated risk (in a competent board room, anyway). I remember hearing a representative from a school bus company talking about pupil security a long time ago. He said we could build the school buses as secure as the customers like; if they wanted to stop a wire-guided missile, they could probably put enough armour on it to do so. Of course, nobody would buy it...
The point here is that there is only so much armour plate you can put into an IT infrastructure. Beyond the threshold of silly, you just need to stop, check that your security efforts have been to the level you specified, then find and prosecute the intruders or write off the loss.
The down side is that you're only human. The up side is that your intruders are, too.
I think it is entirely appropriate to investigate a company when large ammounts of personal information ends up being 'stolen'
I agree, and there should be penalties for egregious misuse of data placed in one's trust.
I do hope, however, that there should be some limit on the liability of IT professionals who do their best to prevent disclosure, but who are either one step behind the black hats or overworked to the point where technical oversight and coverage of the systems in their care is compromised. This isn't just a bleeding heart beating here, I'm worried that overall IT security will suffer if good engineers and sysadmins are frightened away from the security field by the spectre of personal liability. Fewer people in IT security == epic fail.
I see SF as a story where the world, and behaviour, has changed as a result of some technical progress, whether or not that technology is explained. Bradbury, to his credit, did have the world changed because of technology, and didn't explain it at all -- just the effect. This was not Doc Smith's footnotes on corpuscular drive and space suits of phenoline and bakelite. Both had their place.
Why buy a game then pay somebody else to play it?
A programmer should be able to just tell the artist. You need to work together - not fighting!
Goody goody gosh. Although you come across as a Care Bear there, you've got it damned straight. But sometimes the fight begins, is carried out and ends in a single individual's mind. It's not always PvP. An individual has to believe both sides of the fight are accomplishable within themselves.
In Australia (in the University of Victoria, anyway) the degree for Multimedia Design merges art and software by teaching logical discipline to artists, using modern tools such as Maya and Flash et.al. so that this new medium can contain the incredible pool of talent available to fill it.
There are very creative people around, and very logical people around, and every day I become more convinced that a knowledge and talent at art does not preclude logical thinking, and that logical thinking does not preclude one from having the gift of imagination.
I suppose it all starts with that: Imagination, and passion. You have to permit yourself enough emotional attachment to your dreams to want to make something beautiful, fun, and involving. Then, to realise that there are tools and disciplines that can take you from dream to expression, and a willingness to fight through the angst until you accomplish something. Sometimes the fight means working twice as hard for twice as long, but I know it can be done, I've seen the results and so have you. Make the effort to be brilliant, guys, it's worth it.
If you've punched code out on 80 column punched cards
Or perhaps if you used an AM radio over the memory register to help you debug a program, or built an oscilloscope because it would help you as a programmer, because some computers required knowing the state of certain circuits by their square waves.
Sony, on the other hand...
Not necessarily true. "Deliverables" are often based on very real goals, especially in investment banking. Sometimes a deliverable is a hard deadline, such as "must be able to report interest earned on portfolio by (date) or you will face fines from taxation authority". That's hardly a subjective goal.
One of the primary reasons this was done was an exercise for our programmers on 360 coding
Wo0T! Legacy. You should at least train them up on System 370, give them a career path.
Oh...
I hope Warhammer is a little careful about the bug levels at release. The level of adoption of say, Vanguard, was deeply crippled, despite the high resolution landscape and graphics, by too many incidents of falling through the world or waking up inside a rock. If people get browned by frustrating play dynamics, simply moving around, there will never be enough revenue in subscriptions to allow it to grow past that point. Sometimes it's worth waiting to get it right.
Of course, there are a lot of ways to fail, but -- a game has to be relatively bug-free or it isn't immersive. You want customers to shout "more content!", not "fix the bugs!". The former you can handle, the latter will kill you without hope of rez.
These are very bright people, and just because they can figure something out, it doesn't at all mean "anyone can...
Branch corollary: Just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should.
Horses for courses, of courses. I'm running on XP Pro here on the work laptop, and it doesn't take all that long to bring up the desktop, as you say. But there is this annoying and significant pause before you can do anything while XP pre-fetches your taskbar program headers or whatever it is that it does. That takes longer, and you're never entirely sure when full functionality going to arrive (Measure it? Meh, it's a laptop). That indefinite pause after you see the start button is enough to push the boot up to close to a minute or so on my Latitude D620. That minute is nothing at the office when I have a coffee machine to load, but when I'm at the airport or in a meeting I'd really prefer to trim as many seconds as I can; subjectively 10 seconds is a long time when you're in a hurry. So I see this as potentially very valuable to me. YMMV.
I've never actually heard anything suggesting Michelson believed in luminiferous aether
Let me help:
Delta-V, Delta-T, Albert A. Michaelson
Wanted to find out why light moved so brisk;
Needed a much bigger
Interferometer;
Back to the drawing board,
can't get the drift.
-- sorry, remember the quote but not the attribution.
Basically it's an instant-boot into something and instant-on can give a laptop some credibility where it didn't before, i.e In A Hurry. (Stop gloating you non-Windows users, this isn't about you!) Drag that work laptop to the airport and check your mail via the web before it's time to show the security guy the holes in your socks. Sometimes the web is all you need, or Skype, and some companies issue laptops for their consultants but not Blackberries or other decent PDA.
This gives you a chance to do something with a company-approved laptop SOE that doesn't involve waking the slow, cranky and belligerant dragon that is Vista or XP Pro. This Is A Good Thing. Oh, and you can push a button on the screen that boots Windows if you need to read the boss' Powerpoint. If you have the time, that is. Takes a while to wake the dragon.
The reason why they can do this is they are a specific hardware company (ASUS the example I know) who don't have to cater to all forms of hardware -- just their own. Full-cut OS' can't be that inflexible. So it's a quick little trip from the BIOS to a v.fast PDA screentop. Most of what I need is on that little thing, for the rest you press your OS button and load your standard desktop.
"You wouldn't steal a car..." No, I wouldn't.. but if a friend asked, "Hey I got a new (insert cool car here), want me to burn you a copy?" I might think about it.
Not an impossible technology direction. Look up "material deposition" or "fabbers" that are effectively 3-dimensional printers (Ennex is one firm I remember with a web site) used in building complex prototypes used for manufacturing. Then slide the thumb widget that makes the calendar pages fly until we transition from Anno Domini to Star Date.
We can make very complex parts this way today, and some fairly complex machines are possible using this technique. Having a friend lend you a copy of a whole-car file may just be possible in the forseeable future.
Of course, it might also net you a lawsuit from the AIAA as well. Your mileage may vary.
Excessive quoting is going to fill up the tubes
Please quote responsibly.
Can I quote you on that? - Wait, Did I just do that? Rats.
Hey, those are MY electrons. Give them back!
I remember being deposed several times on the same set of questions by both sides of a civil case, during a suit about an auto accident long long ago. I remember the kick I got out of being absolutely consistent on a couple of points. For example, it was very clear to me that it annoyed the deposers no end when I said the car in front and the car behind were simultaneous impacts, and never changed my story by so much as a single adverb (it's an honest account btw). Schadenfreude, I guess. Of course it was a little like having fun at gunpoint, but sometimes you have to take your humour where you find it.
Yes, but a bear doesn't need weeks to prepare a paw swing. The analogy doesn't hold.
The analogy doesn't hold because countries are not bears. Different optimisation strategies for the organism altogether.
Come to Australia, mate. I have a hibiscus that wants that title. Last time I gave it an audit it was in the process of taking over a sheep station in the far north of Queensland.
String theory posits that there are actually 11 (or 12?) dimensions, of which only 4 are "uncoiled" at any given time. In our "universe" those 4 are the three physical dimensions (length, width, height) and time.
Taken 4 at a time you come out with something like 8000 different "universes", each with their own physical laws.
Mygawd, the universe is a browser, and the strings are hyperlinks. That would explain the validity of FSM as a causative agent.
Cloud Computing? You mean they wanted to be *that* closely sssociated with vaporware?
On a slightly less silly note, I like this development. And wierd body plans suit the laboratory environment quite well.
I imagine we could move away from the great black poison in the dirt eventually, if our good wierdly-planned bodies in the laboratory keep up the good work.