Fact checking seems to be out of fashion these days. Thank goodness there are still some who feel that vetting sources and cross referencing story details is more important than sensationalism.
Well, they claim their software started out as open source(read: probably derived from open source projects like vnc/ssh/etc). Their sourceforge page indicates that the code is under GPL license, which implies that the source code should be made available to individuals wanting to use it for their own use.
However,other than the front page and the sourceforge page, there is nothing else on their site indicating that the application is in anyway open source in spirit, letter, or intent.
Of course, you can always just ask them if they are indeed still Open Source, or if they were, but have since reneg'd on their license agreement to be Open Source. I forget... do you need to make your code open source/GPL if your code essentially links to libraries of GPL/Open Source projects? Or perhaps if your product is derived from Open Source application source code?
If they are making use of code from another Open Source project and are burying it in their binary-only distros, might be worthwhile to check their code for library strings and see whose projects' rights are being tread upon and ask why they haven't upheld their GPL/OS obligations.
Jammers are present. They are in the helicopter, in each car, on secret service members in the crowds, and most likely planted in various cars along the route, disguised as "normal" cars
The roads will have been checked/scanned ahead of time and monitored from the time of scan until the time after the motorcade has passed by.
There will be spotters in key locations to check for people who are going to take pot shots.
The cars are armoured
If someone is serious about causing problems, their options would really be limited. A device that needs to be triggered, can be setup to be triggered by the passing by of a certain metal mass ala megnetic ocean mines. Heavy armored cars meet such criteria as a potential trigger.
Standard gas attacks will work on the crowds, so even if the primary target isn't vulnerable, soft targets around him/her will be, causing a diversion.
A well placed charge to collapse a building in front of, behind, or onto the motorcade will be workable, despite signal jamming, as trigger can be done via wires, IR, WIFI, CB+TONE, landline phone call, etc.
The fact is... given enough time, enough mental second guessing, ANYTHING is possible. You do the best you can to guard against known dangers and prepare against them. You can't prepare for what you don't know about or have knowledge/understanding of. The US Govt has a good understanding of tech and tactics used, so I'm pretty sure their defenses will be enough to repel any attack. Nice PR/Marketing, though, with the "heli with a jammer". Since multiple cell towers cover a region, the amount of energy required to block out a football field sized area would be quite enormous. I'm sure such a helicopter can be rigged for this, but would it be practical?:/
So, a faulty and easy to defeat mechanism will be added to an already paying-for-premium device to raise the cost even further without providing true benefit to the consumer. Lovely. Just lovely.
The question becomes... will this information(the fingerprint information) be sent back to Apple via an update? Will this be tied into law enforcement systems so that non-criminals are indexed along with criminals? Will this be used to produce defacto arrest warrants for people, based on their music consumption?
But mainly... just an expensive add on bloatware that shouldn't be there in the first place.
OMG! Ignorance is not an excuse. If you want your content to NOT be crawled, then do the right thing and setup a robots.txt file. Simple as that. If she can't take the time to search for that and take the necessary steps.
I can't believe the courts are allowing any part of her case to move forward. There IS a mechanism in place to tell people to bugger off, robots.txt.
Bought one of these "bargain" systems and had no end of trouble with it.
Google/Search for "c521 linux issues" or "e521 linux issues" and you will see crashes, issues with the dual core processors, and USB keyboard and mice hangs.
Nothing but trouble and Dell makes you jump through hoops to get your monies back. Went through 3 months of Dell Hell for this crap.
Basically, the boards are lacking APIC logic hardware, so if you boot Linux without NOAPIC, you will not see 2 processor cores. If you boot with NOAPIC, you will see two cores, but have unstable USB or Network.
Take your money and buy parts online. You'll pay a little more, but get a better system.
Words "bargain" I ever encountered.
Using a STANDARD pdf handling tool: % pdftotext BALCO_quash_subpoena_sfchronicle.pdf
From the PDF->TXT file:
[snipped to first line before the "blacked out section"]
C. Movants' Efforts to Obtain the Secret Grand Jury Transcripts
[beginning of first blacked out section]
Prior to the return of the Balco indictments, the lead defendant, Victor Conte ("Conte"), began to correspond via e-mail with Movants. (See Ex. 1 to Donnelan Aff.). Neither Movants nor Conte attempted to keep their relationship confidential, as the e-mail correspondence routinely was reported by Movants.2 (Exs. 1, 2, 3, and 11 to Donnelan 1
[... snipped for berevity...]
On June 23, 2004, Fainaru-Wada sent an e-mail to Conte indicating that he (Fainaru-Wada) was busy working on some stories that may be "up on the web soon. Hope you like t hem." (Ex. T to Hershman Decl.). Conte responded that he was looking forward to seeing the article and that his lawyer would be available for comment. (Id.).
[end of first blacked out section]
D. Disclosure of the Montgomery Grand Jury Transcript On June 24, 2004
[more, but why post it when you can read it yourself!?]
Okay... WTF!? Doesn't ANYONE check this stuff before it goes out the door!?
OMG! Wonder if this is how our private documents are "made safe"....
(sarcasm) 1) Robotics helping people at retirement homes... powered by MS... as yet ANOTHER worm spreads through the WinRoboOS, giving script kiddies the ability to perform a major Enema-DDOS of the entire hospital... staff.
2) WinRoboOS powers the next generation robo-surgeon. In the middle of a delicate heart transplant operation, the operating system hits a minor segfault error. The system keeps running, however, the faulty sub-program was terminated. This resulted in the robo-surgeon spinning around and heading for a nearby charging station to reboot.... with heart still in its robo-hands.
3) WinRoboOS powers the military's fighting force, after a successful bid to oust other historically sound developers from that profitable arena. With 100 RoboSoldiers at the forefront, the initial skirmish goes well... until a zero-day vulnerability allows the enemy to switch the friend-or-foe marker flags in the RoboSoldier's code... resulting in massive casualties.
4) WinRoboOS powers your child's newest friend! RoboFriend! Built in with WinEmotions, your child will never need to be alone again! That is... until script kiddies turn your RoboFriend into a RoboZombie and convinces your child to "pose" for some web-shots or show him/her your credit cards... you know, front and back.
Where will Windows powered robotics take us tomorrow? I'm sure it will be a wonderfully bright and happy future. (/sarcasm)
[50% Sarcasm] Wow, this seems like the best option yet. Avoid the endless cycle of security patches, vulnerabilities, and customer complaints by simply not releasing it. Delay until all of the malware and virii writers out there get bored and move onto another platform!
It's brilliant! [/50% Sarcasm]
Seriously, this is starting to sound like one of those internal departmental projects that is suffering from feature creep and such.:( Wonder if MS's attention is elsewhere these days?
The idea of a DOA movie, to me, means a full CG cinematic experience. Ie, the characters should be rendered, not live-actioned.
From what I can see of the trailer, it looks alot like crap. Ie, I'd rather go see DOA characters at a cosplay convention.
Looks like the movie completely misses the point of what DOA is about, but then again, seems to be par for the course for the game->movie conversions.
Message to movie execs: stop screwing it up and you might see better returns.
Ways to screw up a moview derived from a game:
- throwing out the previously established rules/facts of the game universe being converted into a movie.
- get "well known" names to play the part, instead of getting people who actually have a chance of filling the role.
- taking too much "artistic license" with the concept... to the point where it has nothing to do with the game other than some look-alikes and using the name-sake. I'd say it was like fanfiction or doujinshi, but that would insult the fanfiction writers and doujinshi writers, who make better use of established cannon.
Ways to make a great movie based on a game:
- treat it like an indie film... make it real and a true homage to the game and include fanservice!
- focus on quality of actors/acting. CG can only do so much. If you have stiff, shallow actors/actresses, you will have CG'd stiff shallow actors/actresses.
- TALK to the fans and figure out what does and doesn't work. Talk to ALOT of fans. Talking to just a handful of people is a great way to get a film that fulfills the fantasy of one fan and excludes all others.
- REVIEW existing material. Find out what made the game so great, in the first place, that you want to make a movie out of it.
- think community interest, as opposed to the best way to make money up front. Long term financial returns will be a strong reward for something done well and encourages repeat viewings or a strong desire for a sequel.
Please oh please, someone grab the ear of a movie exec/directory/writer/casting director/etc... and get them to do a game movie right. Talk to gamers, for the love of movie!
It is essentially useless to look at things from a fixed period or minimum period view. It's like saying it's "industry standard to wait 3 days before calling". There isn't a fixed rule to it.
Generally speaking, when you jump and how often you jump can depend on alot of factors: - stress - pay - benefits - commute - stagnation(skills/management/business/etc)
The important thing is to look at WHY you are thinking of jumping and when you plan on doing it, is the job you are jumping to better than the one you are leaving. Ie, does it fulfill the gaps of your current job?
Personally, in the last 5 years, I've changed jobs in the IT field as often as in 9-12 months. Each time it was for a different reason, in order: - pay increase - commute issue(3 hours each way) - inflexible work environment - site layoff(entire site shutdown) - extremely chaotic work environment and low pay(but good exposure to high tech) switched to a higher pay, less chaotic environment with a short commute and managable workload
The point is that if you jump, there should be a reason to. If that reason comes up and is compelling enough, it should not matter if you've only been working there for 3 years, 2 years, 1 year, or 6 months. If your current job sucks and you have another job in hand, why would you wait and suffer if there is no point in doing so?
If asked, you should have a good solid reason why you jumped in such a short period of time. It should be a fairly positive reason that doesn't reflect poorly on your previous employers. The person interviewing you will take negativity into account.
While I lean towards "jump around when you're young still", there is no reason why someone who is older cannot jump jobs. See the above regarding having the right reason. If the situation merits it, then take advantage of the opening and make a better life for yourself and your family.
If you skip on opportunities, no one will come back and thank you for your loyalty to sticking with a crappy situation. In fact, from what I've seen, the typical reward is triple the workload, no pay increase(or pay decrease, if you count the unpaid overtime), and a pink slip at the end of it all. If you DO decide to stay, at least make sure you will be compensated(severance pay, retention bonus, etc)
In either case, good luck in finding your own path,
More often than not, the choice to put AV software on systems wasn't a sysadmin choice, but a management/business choice. IE, cost reasons, CYA reasons, lower priority than say getting that next X million dollar project up and running, or some other reason which pre-empts AV stuff.
I don't use AV software on my systems at home, but that's a personal choice. Not due to laziness, but because other measures have been taken: strong firewalling, restricted software on desktops, strong desktop settings, regular backups, and sufficiently educating anyone who uses the computer of the dangers they can face, what online actions are risky, and to abide by the basic rules so as to avoid putting your data/computer at risk.
For half a decade, I've gone without AV software and have had all of my systems virii/adware/malware free. This isn't due to laziness, but diligence and preparation. This isn't due to OS fanatacism, but making a decision about what compromises to make between security and usability. I use WinXPpro, Linux, and MacOSX systems at home.
When people passively rely on external assistance, like AV software, something like this would eventually happen. People make mistakes. Companies make mistakes. And when you have a large install base, those mistakes can easily become big monstrous mistakes.
Right now, ALOT of sysadmins are probably sweating bullets getting systems back online. This isn't because they were lazy. This was because someone at another company screwed up and it impacted their infrastructure, which in turn impacts their business.
Make no mistake, people will get sued and lawyers will get involved. Think it was just the businesses and end users of the AV software that got screwed? What about the customers of the businesses? What about the home users who run their business off of their home computers? Yeah, there'll be some noise about this down the road, make no mistake.
*listens over the cube walls* I don't hear any cursing or screaming, so it hasn't happened here or the OS admins have done their homework over the weekend. In either case, this will be interesting to follow in the months to come.
Mon., 4/17/06 25 Wireless Security
HOMEWORK/LAB 4, 5: Wardriving exercise in Morgantown with Apple laptop and Netstumbler, GPS device. Turn in a one page detailed description of the lab procedure, software and technique as well as a printed map of wireless access points in a certain geographic area of your choosing. NOTE: DO NOT HACK INTO THESE NETWORKS EVEN IF THEY ARE WIDE OPEN WITH NO PASSWORD AS THIS IS ILLEGAL. (Counts as 25 points). Due at beginning of class 4/22/
Note, some areas, the very act of wardriving is illegal.
This is just amazing. By amazing, I mean to say an affront to ethical teaching. It promotes the wrong idea about proper conduct on the internet. It will spawn tons of alarms on different networks. Companies who get scanned will lose countless dollars and hours figuring what new attack was underway.
I strongly believe that the professor should be fired. The students should be told to NOT go forward with the assignment. And the name of the professor and university should be released so that such unethical or thoughtless behaviour by the professor and double-standard thinking by the school can be revealed and acted upon.
I can't believe the school would come back and say that the professor would not be reprimanded, that the assignment can go forward, but not to scan their own computer networks. This implies that the school admins know that it is a security issue and questionable behaviour, but is allowing it to go forward on the internet. Complete and utter retarded and *ss backwards thinking and reasoning.
For some companies I've worked at, a scan is reason enough to ban your IP, if not your IP address block. Performing a scan is grounds for dismissal, if not initiation of criminal charges of misuse of the business systems. This was the case at my old university. Misuse of school systems resulted in dismissal and/or legal proceedings.
The correct and responsible means of testing would have been to setup a training network. Obviously, there is a complete lack of responsible planning on the part of the professor and the school. Or perhaps a lack of understanding of what they are setting up their students and themselves up for.
The student who brought this up REALLY needs to bring this to the attention of his/her fellow students and prevent them from getting into trouble with businesses and the authorities.
Just because your superiors tell you to do it, doesn't mean it's okay to do it.
Reading the article and seeing the responses to the questions was very much like listening to the senate hearings. Ie, very clear answers when the question is aligned with the agenda or beliefs of the person being interviewed/questioned, but very bluntly vague when not in line.
What gets me is that RMS notes that people, in general, lump all of the CC licenses as one entity. He notes that they need to be addressed seperately.
Having said that, RMS is lucid in his responses. I think what gets peoples' goats about RMS is that he is basically unwavering and uncompromising when it comes to his ideals. This has and always will be the case.
My only wish from the article would have been RMS clarifying what portions of the CC Licensing system he considers to be acceptable and what parts he doesn't. Wholesale dismissal of the CC licenses is like getting a paper back with a big fat "F/0" and a note at the bottom saying "Do better next time", without any indication on the paper of what was wrong. (Bad experience with some college professors.
Why gets me is why people keep feeling surprised or shocked when RMS restates his ideals and views: free as in freedom, complete freedom, no restrictions. Yes, it's a hard left. Yes, it's idealistic. Yes, it would cripple companies and businesses that depend on the restriction of information-based goods(music, movies,etc).
But he does have a point. 100 years from now, how will we access DRM'd content that should have gone public domain? How will we read ebooks that can't be readliy converted to other formats? Same with encrypted and locked music, movies, etc?
Personally, he sounds alot like a cross between a hippie, priest, and lawyer, no offense meant to the hippie, priest, or lawyer. But just because he sounds like that, doesn't mean he isn't onto something. It's just not very palatable.
Dude, you released information online regarding the status, or perceived status, of the PS3 system's state of build. You did this as a person with inside information. That violates your NDA.
Here's another snippet of the guy's post that isn't neutral:
"Now in my opinion it doesn't matter how good the PS3 is. If the XBOX 360 is better, then it doesn't really matter how the cell processors work or how good they say it is."
So, as an insider and as someone who worked on the PS3 content, you are making a statement that the XBOX is better, thus saying that while you work on the PS3 stuff, it is bad. How does that not violate your contract? You should be glad Sony doesn't sue you for potential Libel.
Another snippet:
"We've all seen Gears of War for the xbox 360. If that even looks half as good when it comes out then I'll be floored! The game we are making isn't even in the same league as Gears of War. In fact there are many current games out that look just as good and are using the exact same specs. So, on our end we are either not pushing the bar or were just trying to "get a title out"."
Releasing comparative information regarding unreleased games being produced for the PS3. Also potential violation of NDA.
Same kind of thing here regarding timetables:
"Our game just keeps getting moved back....and back.....and back.....and back. Again, where is the box? Where is the final system? When is it coming out? No one knows and in the mean time people in the industry are starting to get just a little salty. I mean I was at e3 2005 and PS3 was almost no where to be seen."
Btw, the people who are getting "salty" are who exactly? Certainly not the Japanese. The statement basically draws the conclusion that since it wasn't highly visible at E3, that the device is basically incomplete/non-productional. As someone who is contracted/employed to work on the games for the system, comments like that hold some weight. NDA violation or Libel. Potential to sue for damages in lost sales, etc.
As for his comments of:
"I can't believe how out of control everything got," he said. "It's absolutely absurd how the Internet can take something relatively harmless and turn it into something so insane... Did I knowingly break NDA? I absolutely did not. I would never do that and I would never want to hurt Sony Online. Did I dance in the grey area by even opening my mouth? Yes I did and I was fired for it. So I guess the new rule for me is, don't ever say anything at all about anything. Ever...ever."
If he was a normal person who did not work for Sony or develop on titles relating to Sony's PS3, then his comments could be taken as such: The common opinions of another gamer. But, he worked for Sony. He expressed opinions regarding the company, the product, the internal processes, and the timelines and timetables of games. He revealed information regarding the demos at the E3 event and regarding the level of detail regarding games being developed. From a legal standpoint, yes, he violated NDA. If that is something he doesn't realise, then he does not understand NDA's thoroughly enough.
By making the comments that he did, he DID hurt Sony. To have one of your internal developers basically bashing on the system, the company practices, second guess the marketing methodology, and promoting the competitor's hardware platform. That counts as hurting Sony.
The internet didn't blow it out of proportion. The internet demonstrated how a leak from an insider can get spread VERY rapidly and result in waves of opinion, which can affect Sony's stock value, the potential sales of their platform, and the potential sales of their competitor's platform. The internet brought his comments to the attention of the media and to the companies, but he was the one who decided to post his thoughts and opinions about inner workings of the company he worked for. The internet didn't force him to do that. It didn't force him to support a competing product and to deride the product(s) he was wo
Hey, sounds like you've got a great idea. AJAX is the new buzzword and quite frankly, with so many people being drawn to it, best of luck.
Here's the issues/problems: - cost. - quality. - features.
First off, do you know what you want? Was this something that was going to be enterprise grade and can handle a good number of visitors or is this something that you just want created for the heck of it? Do you have money to pay the person to develop it? And if you do, do you have enough to include all of the features you want?
Seriously, your best bet is to make friends with someone who has the following characteristics: - free time on his/her hands - the skills or the impetus to learn the skills - good organizational background to build up the site with documentation(unlikely) - someone who can communicate with you clearly and vice versa
This person is most likely willing to help you out without asking for alot in return. Offer them a good chunk of the monies, if any, or free coffee/food/etc.
The first thing you need to do is flesh out your idea more, write pseudo code and flow diagrams to get the ideas down on paper. Then go over it with your friend/coder to rule out or change things that won't work.
Who is this person? Could be a co-worker. Could be someone you meet at the local club/meeting of whatever. Could be someone you find on Craigslist, etc.
Just be prepared to pay mondo bucks, if you want to hire someone outright to code your site. At this point, it isn't a website you and the coder are building. It's a web based application.
Here is your primary problem, above the money and access to skilled help: Time.
If you don't have the time to learn the AJAX language to build a test site, how do you intend to have the time and resources to work with someone to build up your site? If the person you hire is the one with the skills to build the site and they understand it, but you don't, how do you intend to prevent them from walking off with your concept and leaving you without code or product?
Think about that.
Find the time out of the week to set aside for your project first. Learn something about AJAX, like how to code a basic page. Once you have your idea fleshed out in AJAX on your own site, THEN find a developer to help you take it to the next level. Otherwise, you're just wasting time and money.
Btw, have you considered Flex/Flex2? (Adobe/Macromedia product) which requires much less programming experience?
It really isn't clear from your posting, what it is that you do at the company. Obviously, you are not in the IT department. You are more than likely an engineer in one of the development or support departments who makes requests to IT? Not sure from the posting.
A slow IT department is the number 1 criticism I hear. Too much red tape, etc. As other posters have queried, what have you done to help mitigate these issues? Talking to your management(griping), doesn't help the IT department get things done.
Here's an example:
At one company I worked at, the IT department is often given a request. That request is then looked over and basically, it tells them nothing. The request usually reads something like:
We need a few servers to support an application that may need a database and a web server. How soon can this get done?
This is usually followed by weeks, if not months, of back and forth emails that culminate in a series of meetings to iron out the fine details of what is really being requested.
This usually ends up being one of 2 things:
1) The request could easily be handled by existing infrastructure, but the requestors weren't clear enough and/or didn't understand their own needs enough to produce a relevant request.
2) The request requires a significant amount of hardware and infrastructure to be installed because "may need a database and a web server" should have been written as: "We plan on rolling out a national product which will serve over 300,000 customers. We've already announced a start date and have pre-sold accounts to the new system. It needs to tie into existing infrastructure and will require the addition of a SAN to support all of the data being generated."
Both of these situations result from a lack of communication between the various departments and the IT department. This lack of communication and not bringing in the IT department into the early planning meetings results in further issues down the road.
Weeks and months will be spent getting various deparmtental managers to sign off on the work to be done. Work which commits their staff and resources to another department's project.
Additional time for project budget approvals, sometimes requiring the project to be added in after the end of the quarter, so as not to impact the current quarter's earnings reports.
Allocation of network connections(weeks to months from Telco companies) and data center space contracts(weeks).
Then, add in the weeks of testing of the implementation and the predictable arguing and bickering over how to best implement the system. There will be finger pointing and blame games between various departments and groups about which component is fouling up the system, etc.
From an outsider's point of view, the mass of individuals known as IT seem to be slow, but often times, it has more to do with a lack of clear communication.
This isn't to say that some IT departments aren't slow. There are quite a few organizations and departments, whose sole job is to pass the buck and not take responsibility. They take on a task long enough to pass it on to someone else. The work never gets done, but they get entries on their billing. These groups exist. But just try to get rid of them without a massive reorg/downsizing!
If your role isn't that of a decision maker and the environment is intollerable, then leave. Vote with your feet. Find a better job, if it is that unbearable. If it is something you can alter, then work to alter it. Learn more about the IT workings. Find out why something is taking so long. Run the approval tasks to the next rung on the ladder. It's amazing how quickly the "slow" departments can prove to be when properly motivated and/or stimulated.
I work in IT and provide support. I deal with IT and non-IT departments and believe me, there is plenty of blame to go around when it comes to a project or request taking forever and a year. People outside of IT, making requests may blame IT for being
Google is restricting some sites. Yes. But by having servers for the Google Search, the users in China will be able to access content much more quickly. Ie, instead of a slow and unreliable search page, they will now have a high speed and reliable search page.
The only issue is that terms will be censored, as the government determines words that need censoring.
By making information search faster and easier in China, this opens up the minds of people using the net and the people they talk to. It makes the idea of freedom of information more prevelant and better accepted.
By not choosing to enter China, the alternative was that people would stop using Google because it was unusable in China due to dropped connections, poor speeds, etc. People would need to then use state-controlled search engines which could be shutdown outright.
People are saying it's a blow to human rights. I see it as a step forward for human rights. A tiny step, but a step forward nonetheless. Companies and people carrying the idea of freedom of information needs to start making more in-roads into China, and by extension, the Chinese Government's mindset.
The best way to combat opressive governmental systems is to spread the idea of a better system.
What people don't understand is that Google's going into China was probably something which Google negotiated upon from a disadvantaged position. China doesn't care for Google being in China. To be able to be in China and serve search results is a big boon, even with the restrictions. A boon to Google, for sure, but a boon to the people who live in China and want to use Google to search for information and new ideas.
Microsoft isn't really defending Google in the article. They are defending the idea of doing business in China. They are defending the concept that there is significant business opportunity to be had for companies doing business in China. If investors decide to back away from China as a market, that impacts Microsoft, who wants to increase their business in China.
It isn't so much that they are helping Google so much as keeping their ability to invest in China open.
Groups and organizations with ideas which would be considered radical in comparison to opressive governments are often times taking an all or nothing philosophy to oppression. Ie, all access or none at all. Which do you think is better for the people being oppressed?
By forcing an all-or-nothing decision/approach, you back the governments into a corner or you tie the hands of businesses. Often times, to the point where there isn't so much a discussion as there is a shouting match.
Change comes gradually. Sometimes decades, if not centuries. Yes, oppression is wrong. No, it won't change over night. Yes, the filtering of Google isn't optimal. But Google's presence in China helps to increase the visibility of an outside company and still offers a better mechanism to access the web's information. It isn't a great big step, but it's a step forward.
People are so stuck in the mindset of: do what we want or we will sanction you. Except that can't be leveraged against China because they are the biggest buyers of US bonds. They are a major investor in the US government. So sanctions against them is highly unlikely.
Gotta find that middle ground that everyone can agree on at the moment and find a better one down the line.
Google isn't evil. Not from my point of view. They are trying to do the best they can given the restrictions presented to them. Microsoft is hardly cheering them. The last thing Microsoft wants is Google to have a strong footing in China. Microsoft is only defending the idea of doing business in China, not Google's doing business in China.
There is no denying that Bill Gates has donated alot of money. But that isn't too surprising considering he makes a ridiculous amount of money. His money makes ridiculous amounts of money just sitting around. Bill Gates is also seeking good will from the public because his image needs the good will.
While his donations DO help people, it is doubtful that the intentions originated from charitable origins.
Steve Jobs, on the other hand, has a fairly good public image. His goodwill currency is good and he has no need to be charitable. In fact, it could very well be that he donates anonymously so that there isn't publicity drawn to him.
Articles like the one Wired and ArsTechnica leads one to believe that those who donate more are better people. The natural conclusion from such an observation is that richer people are better people because they can donate more. History has shown this to not be the case.
There are quite a few stories, sayings, and proverbs which illustrates the the above. My favorite is one involving donations at a temple during the New Years. Many people are donating money at the local temple. Whenever someone makes a particularly generous donation, there is a gong sounded. A fairly wealthy man comes in and donates chest after chest of gold. He is thanked, but there is no gong sounded. Shortly after, as he is leaving, a poor begger woman approaches and tries to donate a handful of copper coins. When she drops her few coins into the charity box, a monk sounds a gong, signifying a great contribution.
The wealthy man notices this and angrily questions why his many chests of gold did not sound the gong but her's did?
The monk answered that she had very little and yet gave as much as she could. While her few copper coins were not worth much to wealthier people, it was a great sum of money for her. Whereas the amount given by the wealthy man represented a much lesser sum. It was money the man can easily afford to part with whereas the coppers were not for the begger woman.
I do not deny the good the money will do. But I have to say that to judge someone by how much they donate is a poor means of judging.
The wealthy tend to donate because it is something which gives them the attention of others or because the charitable donation garners them profitable returns elsewhere.
Charity really should be for the benefit of those receiving the charity, not for the adulation of the giver. To know that you have done good for an organization, a group, or a cause should be enough. For someone like Bill Gates, such charitable givings are like bandages to his and his company's public image.
In stark contrast, Steve Jobs is a fairly private man. Mainly keeps to himself and doesn't make a scene unless it's at one of his company's presentations or unveilings. He's either at work or he's not. If he donates to charity, he certainly isn't making any noise about having done so.
Given the chance, I'm sure Steve Jobs' company would behave much like a Microsoft Monopoly. But it isn't. And neither is Steve's worth.
Given the choice, I would choose neither Bill nor Steve as my hero. They are both geniuses and visionaries in their own way. But they are not heroes.
You want to pick a hero? Pick Steve Wozniak. Now there is a hero. Pick the local volunteer at the homeless shelter. There's a hero. Pick the dutiful daughter or son who attends to their elderly parents and/or grandparents. Now there's a hero.
There are everyday hero's all around us. But most of us ignore them like we do the beggar woman who gives, because we are so distracted by the chests of gold. I wouldn't choose Bill or Steve.
Lord_Dweomer asks: "As a recent college grad, I took a job to pay the bills, but soon realized that it would end up sucking the life out of me. I work a lot of overtime in a high-stress, tight deadline job. Once you get into that kind of downward spiral, how do you find another job?"
Leverage your time and connections.
All of those co-worker friends you have, all of those business cards you've been stockpiling at all of those work meetings? They're not just interesting pieces of paper used to convey notes and/or passwords.:) If you're on good terms with those folk, maybe it's time to take 5-10 minutes out of your lunch break to ring them up?
Alot of people I know post their resumes up on resume sites like Craigslist or to Monster/Dice/hotjobs/etc. Takes 15-30 minutes to post, then check on it once every few days. Not alot of time.
Another option is to have automated searches run for you through one of the aforementioned job sites.
Yet another option would be to get in touch with people through a business networking service like jigsaw.
"All my free time, during the week, is completely non-existent, and the weekends are needed to take care of chores, and preserve my mental health.
Okay... what do you do at lunch? Are you taking a lunch? Taking a lunch helps preserve sanity. Not to mention keeping things all legal in the employment law books.
Are potential employers typically sensitive to the fact that I may not be able to interview during the week or during standard work hours?
Depends on the employer and on your value to them. Personally, when I had a job interview, I made sure that the time we agreed upon was convenient to them, myself, and my current employer. Ie, during lunch breaks, at the start or end of day, or I take a personal day off.
The fact of the matter is, you are looking for a new job. If the new job is worthwhile to you, then you will need to invest something into getting that job. That means taking a day off sometimes.
Also, will having left here after a year seem like a real black mark on my resume?
Nope. Especially with the recent job losses in the market, it will seem pretty typical. If you are in the tech field, staying for around 1 to 2 years is, I think, around average if you are fairly well established at the company you are working for. 2+ years is if you are working towards a goal within the company. Less than that, you are building up your resume with projects, completed goals, and exposure to new technologies.
The other issue is that if the workplace doesn't work out, you really aren't obligated to stay. What's the point unless you have no other choice? If you are interviewing, you are engaging other choices.
My reasons for leaving, aside from the overtime (I am non-exempt), would be that I've basically been promoted in work load and responsibilities -- and have even taken on another job role, IN ADDITION to my current one. All of this without a raise in pay, or new title.
You really need to look at what you want here. If you want to get compensated for over-time, then you are looking at switching to an hourly wage. In which case, joining a consultant group (Taos, Kforce, ManPower, etc) would be a good way to go. If you just want a higher salary, but don't want to go hourly, then interviewing at a medium to larger sized business is the way to go. Small/Medium businesses and dot coms tend to have a small core of people who work extremely hard and long hours. Many of them are salaried. They are willing to do this because they probably either have stock options or don't feel the effort to switch jobs is good for them.
Whatever the reason, you need to look at your priorities. Want time left over for yourself, your family, your life, etc? Then add it to your want/need list. Want more money, add it onto the list as well. Which one comes first? Decide that before going into the interview.
I'm sorry, but watching even a few political advertisements has me wanting to vomit from the amount of mud slinging and self-praising. This applies to all politicians, btw.
My question and concern is that such "blogs" may fall outside of current legal restrictions and requirements for truthful dissemination of information and whether there will be invasions of privacy by the posting of competitor politician's private information behind password protected dicussion groups on such blogs.
Not that such may not already be employed already, but such official organized blog efforts where ALL content on the site is specific to one candidate or party has me thinking this is the kind of thing that will further polarize and seperate the parties and rile up the people to take sides, not open dialogs for communicating.
The only upshot of this... and perhaps a downside of it... is that it's on a webserver and not taking the form of a mass emailing to my mailbox.:| But it also means that people who follow a particular candidate or party will only be even more isolated and less exposed to the counter arguments of the other party/candidates. Potentially resulting in very narrow viewpoints and inflexible positions.
*grins* I've actually read that. Wow... that was a long time ago. ^_^; A good read for sure, for folks who want to know more about their computers from a "typewriter" starting point.
Slashdot Mirror
I've seen the waiters at TK Noodle doing this for years now. Remote keypad system for taking and making orders.
Unless they're patenting the "skipping ahead of line" part...
Fact checking seems to be out of fashion these days. Thank goodness there are still some who feel that vetting sources and cross referencing story details is more important than sensationalism.
Well, they claim their software started out as open source(read: probably derived from open source projects like vnc/ssh/etc). Their sourceforge page indicates that the code is under GPL license, which implies that the source code should be made available to individuals wanting to use it for their own use.
However,other than the front page and the sourceforge page, there is nothing else on their site indicating that the application is in anyway open source in spirit, letter, or intent.
Of course, you can always just ask them if they are indeed still Open Source, or if they were, but have since reneg'd on their license agreement to be Open Source. I forget... do you need to make your code open source/GPL if your code essentially links to libraries of GPL/Open Source projects? Or perhaps if your product is derived from Open Source application source code?
If they are making use of code from another Open Source project and are burying it in their binary-only distros, might be worthwhile to check their code for library strings and see whose projects' rights are being tread upon and ask why they haven't upheld their GPL/OS obligations.
That's, IF they are using/leveraging/linking...
So...
If someone is serious about causing problems, their options would really be limited. A device that needs to be triggered, can be setup to be triggered by the passing by of a certain metal mass ala megnetic ocean mines. Heavy armored cars meet such criteria as a potential trigger.
Standard gas attacks will work on the crowds, so even if the primary target isn't vulnerable, soft targets around him/her will be, causing a diversion.
A well placed charge to collapse a building in front of, behind, or onto the motorcade will be workable, despite signal jamming, as trigger can be done via wires, IR, WIFI, CB+TONE, landline phone call, etc.
The fact is... given enough time, enough mental second guessing, ANYTHING is possible. You do the best you can to guard against known dangers and prepare against them. You can't prepare for what you don't know about or have knowledge/understanding of. The US Govt has a good understanding of tech and tactics used, so I'm pretty sure their defenses will be enough to repel any attack. Nice PR/Marketing, though, with the "heli with a jammer". Since multiple cell towers cover a region, the amount of energy required to block out a football field sized area would be quite enormous. I'm sure such a helicopter can be rigged for this, but would it be practical? :/
So, a faulty and easy to defeat mechanism will be added to an already paying-for-premium device to raise the cost even further without providing true benefit to the consumer. Lovely. Just lovely.
The question becomes... will this information(the fingerprint information) be sent back to Apple via an update? Will this be tied into law enforcement systems so that non-criminals are indexed along with criminals? Will this be used to produce defacto arrest warrants for people, based on their music consumption?
But mainly... just an expensive add on bloatware that shouldn't be there in the first place.
OMG! Ignorance is not an excuse. If you want your content to NOT be crawled, then do the right thing and setup a robots.txt file. Simple as that. If she can't take the time to search for that and take the necessary steps.
I can't believe the courts are allowing any part of her case to move forward. There IS a mechanism in place to tell people to bugger off, robots.txt.
OMG.
Bought one of these "bargain" systems and had no end of trouble with it. Google/Search for "c521 linux issues" or "e521 linux issues" and you will see crashes, issues with the dual core processors, and USB keyboard and mice hangs. Nothing but trouble and Dell makes you jump through hoops to get your monies back. Went through 3 months of Dell Hell for this crap. Basically, the boards are lacking APIC logic hardware, so if you boot Linux without NOAPIC, you will not see 2 processor cores. If you boot with NOAPIC, you will see two cores, but have unstable USB or Network. Take your money and buy parts online. You'll pay a little more, but get a better system. Words "bargain" I ever encountered.
ESX server.
Okay... this is what is considered secured??
...]
Using a STANDARD pdf handling tool:
% pdftotext BALCO_quash_subpoena_sfchronicle.pdf
From the PDF->TXT file:
[snipped to first line before the "blacked out section"]
C. Movants' Efforts to Obtain the Secret Grand Jury Transcripts
[beginning of first blacked out section]
Prior to the return of the Balco indictments, the lead defendant, Victor Conte ("Conte"), began to correspond via e-mail with Movants. (See Ex. 1 to Donnelan Aff.). Neither Movants nor Conte attempted to keep their relationship confidential, as the e-mail correspondence routinely was reported by Movants.2 (Exs. 1, 2, 3, and 11 to Donnelan 1
[... snipped for berevity
On June 23, 2004, Fainaru-Wada sent an e-mail to Conte indicating that he (Fainaru-Wada) was busy working on some stories that may be "up on the web soon. Hope you like t
hem." (Ex. T to Hershman Decl.). Conte responded that he was looking forward to seeing the article and that his lawyer would be available for comment. (Id.).
[end of first blacked out section]
D. Disclosure of the Montgomery Grand Jury Transcript On June 24, 2004
[more, but why post it when you can read it yourself!?]
Okay... WTF!? Doesn't ANYONE check this stuff before it goes out the door!?
OMG! Wonder if this is how our private documents are "made safe"....
OMG! I can just picture it now...
(sarcasm)
1) Robotics helping people at retirement homes... powered by MS... as yet ANOTHER worm spreads through the WinRoboOS, giving script kiddies the ability to perform a major Enema-DDOS of the entire hospital... staff.
2) WinRoboOS powers the next generation robo-surgeon. In the middle of a delicate heart transplant operation, the operating system hits a minor segfault error. The system keeps running, however, the faulty sub-program was terminated. This resulted in the robo-surgeon spinning around and heading for a nearby charging station to reboot.... with heart still in its robo-hands.
3) WinRoboOS powers the military's fighting force, after a successful bid to oust other historically sound developers from that profitable arena. With 100 RoboSoldiers at the forefront, the initial skirmish goes well... until a zero-day vulnerability allows the enemy to switch the friend-or-foe marker flags in the RoboSoldier's code... resulting in massive casualties.
4) WinRoboOS powers your child's newest friend! RoboFriend! Built in with WinEmotions, your child will never need to be alone again! That is... until script kiddies turn your RoboFriend into a RoboZombie and convinces your child to "pose" for some web-shots or show him/her your credit cards... you know, front and back.
Where will Windows powered robotics take us tomorrow? I'm sure it will be a wonderfully bright and happy future.
(/sarcasm)
[50% Sarcasm]
:( Wonder if MS's attention is elsewhere these days?
Wow, this seems like the best option yet. Avoid the endless cycle of security patches, vulnerabilities, and customer complaints by simply not releasing it. Delay until all of the malware and virii writers out there get bored and move onto another platform!
It's brilliant!
[/50% Sarcasm]
Seriously, this is starting to sound like one of those internal departmental projects that is suffering from feature creep and such.
The idea of a DOA movie, to me, means a full CG cinematic experience. Ie, the characters should be rendered, not live-actioned. From what I can see of the trailer, it looks alot like crap. Ie, I'd rather go see DOA characters at a cosplay convention. Looks like the movie completely misses the point of what DOA is about, but then again, seems to be par for the course for the game->movie conversions. Message to movie execs: stop screwing it up and you might see better returns. Ways to screw up a moview derived from a game: - throwing out the previously established rules/facts of the game universe being converted into a movie. - get "well known" names to play the part, instead of getting people who actually have a chance of filling the role. - taking too much "artistic license" with the concept... to the point where it has nothing to do with the game other than some look-alikes and using the name-sake. I'd say it was like fanfiction or doujinshi, but that would insult the fanfiction writers and doujinshi writers, who make better use of established cannon. Ways to make a great movie based on a game: - treat it like an indie film... make it real and a true homage to the game and include fanservice! - focus on quality of actors/acting. CG can only do so much. If you have stiff, shallow actors/actresses, you will have CG'd stiff shallow actors/actresses. - TALK to the fans and figure out what does and doesn't work. Talk to ALOT of fans. Talking to just a handful of people is a great way to get a film that fulfills the fantasy of one fan and excludes all others. - REVIEW existing material. Find out what made the game so great, in the first place, that you want to make a movie out of it. - think community interest, as opposed to the best way to make money up front. Long term financial returns will be a strong reward for something done well and encourages repeat viewings or a strong desire for a sequel. Please oh please, someone grab the ear of a movie exec/directory/writer/casting director/etc... and get them to do a game movie right. Talk to gamers, for the love of movie!
It is essentially useless to look at things from a fixed period or minimum period view. It's like saying it's "industry standard to wait 3 days before calling". There isn't a fixed rule to it.
Generally speaking, when you jump and how often you jump can depend on alot of factors:
- stress
- pay
- benefits
- commute
- stagnation(skills/management/business/etc)
The important thing is to look at WHY you are thinking of jumping and when you plan on doing it, is the job you are jumping to better than the one you are leaving. Ie, does it fulfill the gaps of your current job?
Personally, in the last 5 years, I've changed jobs in the IT field as often as in 9-12 months. Each time it was for a different reason, in order:
- pay increase
- commute issue(3 hours each way)
- inflexible work environment
- site layoff(entire site shutdown)
- extremely chaotic work environment and low pay(but good exposure to high tech) switched to a higher pay, less chaotic environment with a short commute and managable workload
The point is that if you jump, there should be a reason to. If that reason comes up and is compelling enough, it should not matter if you've only been working there for 3 years, 2 years, 1 year, or 6 months. If your current job sucks and you have another job in hand, why would you wait and suffer if there is no point in doing so?
If asked, you should have a good solid reason why you jumped in such a short period of time. It should be a fairly positive reason that doesn't reflect poorly on your previous employers. The person interviewing you will take negativity into account.
While I lean towards "jump around when you're young still", there is no reason why someone who is older cannot jump jobs. See the above regarding having the right reason. If the situation merits it, then take advantage of the opening and make a better life for yourself and your family.
If you skip on opportunities, no one will come back and thank you for your loyalty to sticking with a crappy situation. In fact, from what I've seen, the typical reward is triple the workload, no pay increase(or pay decrease, if you count the unpaid overtime), and a pink slip at the end of it all. If you DO decide to stay, at least make sure you will be compensated(severance pay, retention bonus, etc)
In either case, good luck in finding your own path,
Digital Photo
More often than not, the choice to put AV software on systems wasn't a sysadmin choice, but a management/business choice. IE, cost reasons, CYA reasons, lower priority than say getting that next X million dollar project up and running, or some other reason which pre-empts AV stuff.
I don't use AV software on my systems at home, but that's a personal choice. Not due to laziness, but because other measures have been taken: strong firewalling, restricted software on desktops, strong desktop settings, regular backups, and sufficiently educating anyone who uses the computer of the dangers they can face, what online actions are risky, and to abide by the basic rules so as to avoid putting your data/computer at risk.
For half a decade, I've gone without AV software and have had all of my systems virii/adware/malware free. This isn't due to laziness, but diligence and preparation. This isn't due to OS fanatacism, but making a decision about what compromises to make between security and usability. I use WinXPpro, Linux, and MacOSX systems at home.
When people passively rely on external assistance, like AV software, something like this would eventually happen. People make mistakes. Companies make mistakes. And when you have a large install base, those mistakes can easily become big monstrous mistakes.
Right now, ALOT of sysadmins are probably sweating bullets getting systems back online. This isn't because they were lazy. This was because someone at another company screwed up and it impacted their infrastructure, which in turn impacts their business.
Make no mistake, people will get sued and lawyers will get involved. Think it was just the businesses and end users of the AV software that got screwed? What about the customers of the businesses? What about the home users who run their business off of their home computers? Yeah, there'll be some noise about this down the road, make no mistake.
*listens over the cube walls* I don't hear any cursing or screaming, so it hasn't happened here or the OS admins have done their homework over the weekend. In either case, this will be interesting to follow in the months to come.
http://www.be.wvu.edu/divmim/mgmt/kleist/MANG%20 493S%20Syllabus%202006.htm
Mon., 4/17/06 25 Wireless Security HOMEWORK/LAB 4, 5: Wardriving exercise in Morgantown with Apple laptop and Netstumbler, GPS device. Turn in a one page detailed description of the lab procedure, software and technique as well as a printed map of wireless access points in a certain geographic area of your choosing. NOTE: DO NOT HACK INTO THESE NETWORKS EVEN IF THEY ARE WIDE OPEN WITH NO PASSWORD AS THIS IS ILLEGAL. (Counts as 25 points). Due at beginning of class 4/22/
Note, some areas, the very act of wardriving is illegal.
This is just amazing. By amazing, I mean to say an affront to ethical teaching. It promotes the wrong idea about proper conduct on the internet. It will spawn tons of alarms on different networks. Companies who get scanned will lose countless dollars and hours figuring what new attack was underway.
I strongly believe that the professor should be fired. The students should be told to NOT go forward with the assignment. And the name of the professor and university should be released so that such unethical or thoughtless behaviour by the professor and double-standard thinking by the school can be revealed and acted upon.
I can't believe the school would come back and say that the professor would not be reprimanded, that the assignment can go forward, but not to scan their own computer networks. This implies that the school admins know that it is a security issue and questionable behaviour, but is allowing it to go forward on the internet. Complete and utter retarded and *ss backwards thinking and reasoning.
For some companies I've worked at, a scan is reason enough to ban your IP, if not your IP address block. Performing a scan is grounds for dismissal, if not initiation of criminal charges of misuse of the business systems. This was the case at my old university. Misuse of school systems resulted in dismissal and/or legal proceedings.
The correct and responsible means of testing would have been to setup a training network. Obviously, there is a complete lack of responsible planning on the part of the professor and the school. Or perhaps a lack of understanding of what they are setting up their students and themselves up for.
The student who brought this up REALLY needs to bring this to the attention of his/her fellow students and prevent them from getting into trouble with businesses and the authorities.
Just because your superiors tell you to do it, doesn't mean it's okay to do it.
Reading the article and seeing the responses to the questions was very much like listening to the senate hearings. Ie, very clear answers when the question is aligned with the agenda or beliefs of the person being interviewed/questioned, but very bluntly vague when not in line.
What gets me is that RMS notes that people, in general, lump all of the CC licenses as one entity. He notes that they need to be addressed seperately.
Having said that, RMS is lucid in his responses. I think what gets peoples' goats about RMS is that he is basically unwavering and uncompromising when it comes to his ideals. This has and always will be the case.
My only wish from the article would have been RMS clarifying what portions of the CC Licensing system he considers to be acceptable and what parts he doesn't. Wholesale dismissal of the CC licenses is like getting a paper back with a big fat "F/0" and a note at the bottom saying "Do better next time", without any indication on the paper of what was wrong. (Bad experience with some college professors.
Why gets me is why people keep feeling surprised or shocked when RMS restates his ideals and views: free as in freedom, complete freedom, no restrictions. Yes, it's a hard left. Yes, it's idealistic. Yes, it would cripple companies and businesses that depend on the restriction of information-based goods(music, movies,etc).
But he does have a point. 100 years from now, how will we access DRM'd content that should have gone public domain? How will we read ebooks that can't be readliy converted to other formats? Same with encrypted and locked music, movies, etc?
Personally, he sounds alot like a cross between a hippie, priest, and lawyer, no offense meant to the hippie, priest, or lawyer. But just because he sounds like that, doesn't mean he isn't onto something. It's just not very palatable.
Dude, you released information online regarding the status, or perceived status, of the PS3 system's state of build. You did this as a person with inside information. That violates your NDA.
Here's another snippet of the guy's post that isn't neutral:
"Now in my opinion it doesn't matter how good the PS3 is. If the XBOX 360 is better, then it doesn't really matter how the cell processors work or how good they say it is."
So, as an insider and as someone who worked on the PS3 content, you are making a statement that the XBOX is better, thus saying that while you work on the PS3 stuff, it is bad. How does that not violate your contract? You should be glad Sony doesn't sue you for potential Libel.
Another snippet:
"We've all seen Gears of War for the xbox 360. If that even looks half as good when it comes out then I'll be floored! The game we are making isn't even in the same league as Gears of War. In fact there are many current games out that look just as good and are using the exact same specs. So, on our end we are either not pushing the bar or were just trying to "get a title out"."
Releasing comparative information regarding unreleased games being produced for the PS3. Also potential violation of NDA.
Same kind of thing here regarding timetables:
"Our game just keeps getting moved back....and back.....and back.....and back. Again, where is the box? Where is the final system? When is it coming out? No one knows and in the mean time people in the industry are starting to get just a little salty. I mean I was at e3 2005 and PS3 was almost no where to be seen."
Btw, the people who are getting "salty" are who exactly? Certainly not the Japanese. The statement basically draws the conclusion that since it wasn't highly visible at E3, that the device is basically incomplete/non-productional. As someone who is contracted/employed to work on the games for the system, comments like that hold some weight. NDA violation or Libel. Potential to sue for damages in lost sales, etc.
As for his comments of:
"I can't believe how out of control everything got," he said. "It's absolutely absurd how the Internet can take something relatively harmless and turn it into something so insane... Did I knowingly break NDA? I absolutely did not. I would never do that and I would never want to hurt Sony Online. Did I dance in the grey area by even opening my mouth? Yes I did and I was fired for it. So I guess the new rule for me is, don't ever say anything at all about anything. Ever...ever."
If he was a normal person who did not work for Sony or develop on titles relating to Sony's PS3, then his comments could be taken as such: The common opinions of another gamer. But, he worked for Sony. He expressed opinions regarding the company, the product, the internal processes, and the timelines and timetables of games. He revealed information regarding the demos at the E3 event and regarding the level of detail regarding games being developed. From a legal standpoint, yes, he violated NDA. If that is something he doesn't realise, then he does not understand NDA's thoroughly enough.
By making the comments that he did, he DID hurt Sony. To have one of your internal developers basically bashing on the system, the company practices, second guess the marketing methodology, and promoting the competitor's hardware platform. That counts as hurting Sony.
The internet didn't blow it out of proportion. The internet demonstrated how a leak from an insider can get spread VERY rapidly and result in waves of opinion, which can affect Sony's stock value, the potential sales of their platform, and the potential sales of their competitor's platform. The internet brought his comments to the attention of the media and to the companies, but he was the one who decided to post his thoughts and opinions about inner workings of the company he worked for. The internet didn't force him to do that. It didn't force him to support a competing product and to deride the product(s) he was wo
Hey, sounds like you've got a great idea. AJAX is the new buzzword and quite frankly, with so many people being drawn to it, best of luck.
Here's the issues/problems:
- cost.
- quality.
- features.
First off, do you know what you want? Was this something that was going to be enterprise grade and can handle a good number of visitors or is this something that you just want created for the heck of it? Do you have money to pay the person to develop it? And if you do, do you have enough to include all of the features you want?
Seriously, your best bet is to make friends with someone who has the following characteristics:
- free time on his/her hands
- the skills or the impetus to learn the skills
- good organizational background to build up the site with documentation(unlikely)
- someone who can communicate with you clearly and vice versa
This person is most likely willing to help you out without asking for alot in return. Offer them a good chunk of the monies, if any, or free coffee/food/etc.
The first thing you need to do is flesh out your idea more, write pseudo code and flow diagrams to get the ideas down on paper. Then go over it with your friend/coder to rule out or change things that won't work.
Who is this person? Could be a co-worker. Could be someone you meet at the local club/meeting of whatever. Could be someone you find on Craigslist, etc.
Just be prepared to pay mondo bucks, if you want to hire someone outright to code your site. At this point, it isn't a website you and the coder are building. It's a web based application.
Here is your primary problem, above the money and access to skilled help: Time.
If you don't have the time to learn the AJAX language to build a test site, how do you intend to have the time and resources to work with someone to build up your site? If the person you hire is the one with the skills to build the site and they understand it, but you don't, how do you intend to prevent them from walking off with your concept and leaving you without code or product?
Think about that.
Find the time out of the week to set aside for your project first. Learn something about AJAX, like how to code a basic page. Once you have your idea fleshed out in AJAX on your own site, THEN find a developer to help you take it to the next level. Otherwise, you're just wasting time and money.
Btw, have you considered Flex/Flex2? (Adobe/Macromedia product) which requires much less programming experience?
It really isn't clear from your posting, what it is that you do at the company. Obviously, you are not in the IT department. You are more than likely an engineer in one of the development or support departments who makes requests to IT? Not sure from the posting.
A slow IT department is the number 1 criticism I hear. Too much red tape, etc. As other posters have queried, what have you done to help mitigate these issues? Talking to your management(griping), doesn't help the IT department get things done.
Here's an example:
At one company I worked at, the IT department is often given a request. That request is then looked over and basically, it tells them nothing. The request usually reads something like:
We need a few servers to support an application that may need a database and a web server. How soon can this get done?
This is usually followed by weeks, if not months, of back and forth emails that culminate in a series of meetings to iron out the fine details of what is really being requested.
This usually ends up being one of 2 things:
1) The request could easily be handled by existing infrastructure, but the requestors weren't clear enough and/or didn't understand their own needs enough to produce a relevant request.
2) The request requires a significant amount of hardware and infrastructure to be installed because "may need a database and a web server" should have been written as: "We plan on rolling out a national product which will serve over 300,000 customers. We've already announced a start date and have pre-sold accounts to the new system. It needs to tie into existing infrastructure and will require the addition of a SAN to support all of the data being generated."
Both of these situations result from a lack of communication between the various departments and the IT department. This lack of communication and not bringing in the IT department into the early planning meetings results in further issues down the road.
Weeks and months will be spent getting various deparmtental managers to sign off on the work to be done. Work which commits their staff and resources to another department's project.
Additional time for project budget approvals, sometimes requiring the project to be added in after the end of the quarter, so as not to impact the current quarter's earnings reports.
Allocation of network connections(weeks to months from Telco companies) and data center space contracts(weeks).
Then, add in the weeks of testing of the implementation and the predictable arguing and bickering over how to best implement the system. There will be finger pointing and blame games between various departments and groups about which component is fouling up the system, etc.
From an outsider's point of view, the mass of individuals known as IT seem to be slow, but often times, it has more to do with a lack of clear communication.
This isn't to say that some IT departments aren't slow. There are quite a few organizations and departments, whose sole job is to pass the buck and not take responsibility. They take on a task long enough to pass it on to someone else. The work never gets done, but they get entries on their billing. These groups exist. But just try to get rid of them without a massive reorg/downsizing!
If your role isn't that of a decision maker and the environment is intollerable, then leave. Vote with your feet. Find a better job, if it is that unbearable. If it is something you can alter, then work to alter it. Learn more about the IT workings. Find out why something is taking so long. Run the approval tasks to the next rung on the ladder. It's amazing how quickly the "slow" departments can prove to be when properly motivated and/or stimulated.
I work in IT and provide support. I deal with IT and non-IT departments and believe me, there is plenty of blame to go around when it comes to a project or request taking forever and a year. People outside of IT, making requests may blame IT for being
I think alot of people are missing the point.
Google is restricting some sites. Yes. But by having servers for the Google Search, the users in China will be able to access content much more quickly. Ie, instead of a slow and unreliable search page, they will now have a high speed and reliable search page.
The only issue is that terms will be censored, as the government determines words that need censoring.
By making information search faster and easier in China, this opens up the minds of people using the net and the people they talk to. It makes the idea of freedom of information more prevelant and better accepted.
By not choosing to enter China, the alternative was that people would stop using Google because it was unusable in China due to dropped connections, poor speeds, etc. People would need to then use state-controlled search engines which could be shutdown outright.
People are saying it's a blow to human rights. I see it as a step forward for human rights. A tiny step, but a step forward nonetheless. Companies and people carrying the idea of freedom of information needs to start making more in-roads into China, and by extension, the Chinese Government's mindset.
The best way to combat opressive governmental systems is to spread the idea of a better system.
What people don't understand is that Google's going into China was probably something which Google negotiated upon from a disadvantaged position. China doesn't care for Google being in China. To be able to be in China and serve search results is a big boon, even with the restrictions. A boon to Google, for sure, but a boon to the people who live in China and want to use Google to search for information and new ideas.
Microsoft isn't really defending Google in the article. They are defending the idea of doing business in China. They are defending the concept that there is significant business opportunity to be had for companies doing business in China. If investors decide to back away from China as a market, that impacts Microsoft, who wants to increase their business in China.
It isn't so much that they are helping Google so much as keeping their ability to invest in China open.
Groups and organizations with ideas which would be considered radical in comparison to opressive governments are often times taking an all or nothing philosophy to oppression. Ie, all access or none at all. Which do you think is better for the people being oppressed?
By forcing an all-or-nothing decision/approach, you back the governments into a corner or you tie the hands of businesses. Often times, to the point where there isn't so much a discussion as there is a shouting match.
Change comes gradually. Sometimes decades, if not centuries. Yes, oppression is wrong. No, it won't change over night. Yes, the filtering of Google isn't optimal. But Google's presence in China helps to increase the visibility of an outside company and still offers a better mechanism to access the web's information. It isn't a great big step, but it's a step forward.
People are so stuck in the mindset of: do what we want or we will sanction you. Except that can't be leveraged against China because they are the biggest buyers of US bonds. They are a major investor in the US government. So sanctions against them is highly unlikely.
Gotta find that middle ground that everyone can agree on at the moment and find a better one down the line.
Google isn't evil. Not from my point of view. They are trying to do the best they can given the restrictions presented to them. Microsoft is hardly cheering them. The last thing Microsoft wants is Google to have a strong footing in China. Microsoft is only defending the idea of doing business in China, not Google's doing business in China.
From the Forbes 2005 net worth list:
$3 billion dollars net worth
$46.5 billion dollars net worth
There is no denying that Bill Gates has donated alot of money. But that isn't too surprising considering he makes a ridiculous amount of money. His money makes ridiculous amounts of money just sitting around. Bill Gates is also seeking good will from the public because his image needs the good will.
While his donations DO help people, it is doubtful that the intentions originated from charitable origins.
Steve Jobs, on the other hand, has a fairly good public image. His goodwill currency is good and he has no need to be charitable. In fact, it could very well be that he donates anonymously so that there isn't publicity drawn to him.
Articles like the one Wired and ArsTechnica leads one to believe that those who donate more are better people. The natural conclusion from such an observation is that richer people are better people because they can donate more. History has shown this to not be the case.
There are quite a few stories, sayings, and proverbs which illustrates the the above. My favorite is one involving donations at a temple during the New Years. Many people are donating money at the local temple. Whenever someone makes a particularly generous donation, there is a gong sounded. A fairly wealthy man comes in and donates chest after chest of gold. He is thanked, but there is no gong sounded. Shortly after, as he is leaving, a poor begger woman approaches and tries to donate a handful of copper coins. When she drops her few coins into the charity box, a monk sounds a gong, signifying a great contribution.
The wealthy man notices this and angrily questions why his many chests of gold did not sound the gong but her's did?
The monk answered that she had very little and yet gave as much as she could. While her few copper coins were not worth much to wealthier people, it was a great sum of money for her. Whereas the amount given by the wealthy man represented a much lesser sum. It was money the man can easily afford to part with whereas the coppers were not for the begger woman.
I do not deny the good the money will do. But I have to say that to judge someone by how much they donate is a poor means of judging.
The wealthy tend to donate because it is something which gives them the attention of others or because the charitable donation garners them profitable returns elsewhere.
Charity really should be for the benefit of those receiving the charity, not for the adulation of the giver. To know that you have done good for an organization, a group, or a cause should be enough. For someone like Bill Gates, such charitable givings are like bandages to his and his company's public image.
In stark contrast, Steve Jobs is a fairly private man. Mainly keeps to himself and doesn't make a scene unless it's at one of his company's presentations or unveilings. He's either at work or he's not. If he donates to charity, he certainly isn't making any noise about having done so.
Given the chance, I'm sure Steve Jobs' company would behave much like a Microsoft Monopoly. But it isn't. And neither is Steve's worth.
Given the choice, I would choose neither Bill nor Steve as my hero. They are both geniuses and visionaries in their own way. But they are not heroes.
You want to pick a hero? Pick Steve Wozniak. Now there is a hero. Pick the local volunteer at the homeless shelter. There's a hero. Pick the dutiful daughter or son who attends to their elderly parents and/or grandparents. Now there's a hero.
There are everyday hero's all around us. But most of us ignore them like we do the beggar woman who gives, because we are so distracted by the chests of gold. I wouldn't choose Bill or Steve.
Lord_Dweomer asks: "As a recent college grad, I took a job to pay the bills, but soon realized that it would end up sucking the life out of me. I work a lot of overtime in a high-stress, tight deadline job. Once you get into that kind of downward spiral, how do you find another job?"
Leverage your time and connections.
All of those co-worker friends you have, all of those business cards you've been stockpiling at all of those work meetings? They're not just interesting pieces of paper used to convey notes and/or passwords. :) If you're on good terms with those folk, maybe it's time to take 5-10 minutes out of your lunch break to ring them up?
Alot of people I know post their resumes up on resume sites like Craigslist or to Monster/Dice/hotjobs/etc. Takes 15-30 minutes to post, then check on it once every few days. Not alot of time.
Another option is to have automated searches run for you through one of the aforementioned job sites.
Yet another option would be to get in touch with people through a business networking service like jigsaw.
"All my free time, during the week, is completely non-existent, and the weekends are needed to take care of chores, and preserve my mental health.
Okay... what do you do at lunch? Are you taking a lunch? Taking a lunch helps preserve sanity. Not to mention keeping things all legal in the employment law books.
Are potential employers typically sensitive to the fact that I may not be able to interview during the week or during standard work hours?
Depends on the employer and on your value to them. Personally, when I had a job interview, I made sure that the time we agreed upon was convenient to them, myself, and my current employer. Ie, during lunch breaks, at the start or end of day, or I take a personal day off.
The fact of the matter is, you are looking for a new job. If the new job is worthwhile to you, then you will need to invest something into getting that job. That means taking a day off sometimes.
Also, will having left here after a year seem like a real black mark on my resume?
Nope. Especially with the recent job losses in the market, it will seem pretty typical. If you are in the tech field, staying for around 1 to 2 years is, I think, around average if you are fairly well established at the company you are working for. 2+ years is if you are working towards a goal within the company. Less than that, you are building up your resume with projects, completed goals, and exposure to new technologies.
The other issue is that if the workplace doesn't work out, you really aren't obligated to stay. What's the point unless you have no other choice? If you are interviewing, you are engaging other choices.
My reasons for leaving, aside from the overtime (I am non-exempt), would be that I've basically been promoted in work load and responsibilities -- and have even taken on another job role, IN ADDITION to my current one. All of this without a raise in pay, or new title.
You really need to look at what you want here. If you want to get compensated for over-time, then you are looking at switching to an hourly wage. In which case, joining a consultant group (Taos, Kforce, ManPower, etc) would be a good way to go. If you just want a higher salary, but don't want to go hourly, then interviewing at a medium to larger sized business is the way to go. Small/Medium businesses and dot coms tend to have a small core of people who work extremely hard and long hours. Many of them are salaried. They are willing to do this because they probably either have stock options or don't feel the effort to switch jobs is good for them.
Whatever the reason, you need to look at your priorities. Want time left over for yourself, your family, your life, etc? Then add it to your want/need list. Want more money, add it onto the list as well. Which one comes first? Decide that before going into the interview.
I'm sorry, but watching even a few political advertisements has me wanting to vomit from the amount of mud slinging and self-praising. This applies to all politicians, btw.
My question and concern is that such "blogs" may fall outside of current legal restrictions and requirements for truthful dissemination of information and whether there will be invasions of privacy by the posting of competitor politician's private information behind password protected dicussion groups on such blogs.
Not that such may not already be employed already, but such official organized blog efforts where ALL content on the site is specific to one candidate or party has me thinking this is the kind of thing that will further polarize and seperate the parties and rile up the people to take sides, not open dialogs for communicating.
The only upshot of this... and perhaps a downside of it... is that it's on a webserver and not taking the form of a mass emailing to my mailbox. :| But it also means that people who follow a particular candidate or party will only be even more isolated and less exposed to the counter arguments of the other party/candidates. Potentially resulting in very narrow viewpoints and inflexible positions.
*grins* I've actually read that. Wow... that was a long time ago. ^_^; A good read for sure, for folks who want to know more about their computers from a "typewriter" starting point.