Also, as the article mentions Rendezvous (and its less sexy name, ZeroConf) only works on your local subnet, so you don't have to worry about overhead and chattiness with finding your neighbor's equipment as well as that web server in Uzbekistan.
So, what happens if I have an unsecured wifi in my house & my neighbor has one in their house? Is all this stuff going to start discovering each other? If I have the new airGizmo, is my stereo going to start playing tunes from their iPod?
The questions may sound trollish, but are not intended as such. I know security can be implemented, I'm curious as to what could happen if it were not.
A permanent base is somewhat limited in the area it can explore. In all likelihood, a mobile base would also have rovers, but those rovers would travel a limited distance from the base. A permanent base would require burlier rovers for extended expeditions.
earthbound metaphor:
From your house you can travel pretty easily in the immediate are by walking, unburdened, knowing you're close to home. To go a little farther maybe you ride a bike. But there's a practical limit to how far you can go in a day & still return home for food, rest, etc. Now, if you have a motorhome, you don't quite have the same comforts as a permanent home, but you're sheltered at the end of the day - you can take off your outside clothes, sit down to take a dump, etc. With the motorhome you can still carry along the bikes to do local exploring. Sure, motorhomes break down. Permanent homes need maintenance too. The nice thing about the motorhome is you aren't confined to living next to the airport.
If you are willing to do it for Linux...but not Windows...wouldn't that make you elitist?
Using open source software without developing open source software would make me a greedy, self centered prick - not elitist.
I happen to agree with the argument that diversity is beneficial. Thats true at the OS level, the browser level, the hardware level, the router level, the food crop level, etc. Competition is good. Its good for the consumer in terms of lower prices & added features. Monoculture/homogenaity is a negative. Isn't it great to live in a world where if I don't like something, say MS products for example, I can pick a different one! What a concept! If I don't like Bud, I can drink Miller. Or brew my own. If I don't want to drive a Trabant, I can buy a Jeep. Or ride a motorcycle. Or walk. What a horrid world it would indeed be if I didn't like the Trabant, but my only choice was to either fix it myself or not use it.
Happy Mozilla/Netscape user. Since before there even was an IE.
A lot of developers seem to have chosen the alternative of working on Mozilla, or Linux, or a variety of other projects. Really, isn't MS big enough to fix their own problems? What's their cash reserve up to now - $50 billion? And after something like 2 years of a new focus on security the holes get bigger & the exploits arrive more quickly? And you want a bunch of volunteers - that don't have access to the source code they're trying to fix - to create temporary solutions until Microsoft gets around to it? Are you fucking kidding me?
Although what I really want to do is to imagine a Beowulf cluster of these...
I don't think you're far off. I'm thinking modular base. each unit being moveable / liftable to 1) stay on top of accumulated snowfall and 2) move away from the calving edge of the ice shelf.
The other problem mentioned was the psychological impact of living under a couple tons of ice. Apparently crawling down a tunnel to live frozen underground like some kind of ice troglodyte wasn't appealing to the residents.
During the colonial period, it was typically not the colonists themselves that financed their trip to the new world. Instead, people with money, i.e. businessmen, sponsored colonists. Outfit a ship full of people looking for something new, or willing to work as indentured servants to get to the new world; give 'em all the supplies you think they'll need to survive & they agree to send home profitable goods. In those days it largely meant fur. In this respect, sponsoring people to take off into space & mine asteroids is a perfectly relevant model.
I work at a bank. A lot of the applications used internally are web apps that require IE...
I bet you work at Wells Fargo. It blows my mind, but it looks like all their apps are browser based. Kinda makes a guy wonder why he banks there, come to think of it...
I like your summary. I've also found that, as a technologist writing code, my assessment of how a software product is written is often different from a project manager's. This happens before during and after projects - we each have our own perspective on the process & probably neither of us really understands how it will or did get done.
You have it backwards. Saddam was a participant in the War on Terror, on the side of the terrorists.
He was paying $25,000 each to the families of suicide bombers who completed their attacks.
Families of Palestinians bombing Israel, not people threatening the US. Still not cool, but also does not justify a preventative invasion by the US.
Members of Saddam's secret police were members of Al Qaeda.
Not true. According to the Washington Post & New York Times, there may be a mixup due to name similarities between some Al Queda members & the dude in the secret police.
Remember the World Trade Center bombing? Read the previous link, it is scary has hell. Iraq apparently had a hand in it and sheltered one of the plotters.
I have a hard time believing that opinionjournal.com is a definitive source on this subject. Frankly, I'd expect that it would've been covered more in mainstream press if it were true. In any case, it does not justify the war.
And then there was Iraq's plans to attack the US:
June 19, 2004 -- Russian President Vladimir Putin yesterday buttressed President Bush's claim that Iraq posed a direct threat to America by saying Russian intelligence was tipped off that Saddam Hussein was preparing anti-American attacks after 9/11.
Putin said the warning was relayed to Bush, who personally thanked one of Russia's spy chiefs for it.
The funny thing about this one is that US intelligence officials apparently don't know a thing about it! Again, cite coverage in the Washington Post & New York Times. Maybe its the insider knowledge that Cheney has, but has neglected to share with the commission investigating the 9/11 attacks on the US.
And then there are Zarqawi and Abu Nidal , two of the most blood-thirsty savages engaging in terrorism, both of whom found a home in Iraq.
You mean the guys that moved to Iraq after the US bombed the hell out of it? I think they'd still be living elsewhere if we hadn't gone in & made a mess of things.
No, I'm afraid you have it backwards, Saddam was both a participant and an enabler of terrorism. We did the right thing just based on terrorism.
So, No, you don't have it right. The US did not do the right thing by going in there 'just based on terrorism.' I humbly suggest that you consider verifying your news sources before buying the cock and bull story put out by the people continually changing their stories trying to justify an illegal and unethical war.
That is not even considering the many banned activities going on in Iraq in defiance of the UN. Read David Kay's report sometime, or some of the other UN material. For your convenience, here is an excert from his statement:
We have discovered dozens of WMD-related program activities and significant amounts of equipment that Iraq concealed from the United Nations during the inspections that began in late 2002. The discovery of these deliberate concealment efforts have come about both through the admissions of Iraqi scientists and officials concerning information they deliberately withheld and through physical evidence of equipment and activities that ISG has discovered that should have been declared to the UN. Let me just give you a few examples of these concealment efforts, some of which I will elaborate on later:
And this is what its come to; an Administration that justified a war based on stockpiles of WMD has come up with vague evidence of 'WMD programs'. As I recall, the centerfuge that was found had been buried in a scientist's back yard for 12 years. Hardly a WMD program. When Colin Powell went to the UN he claimed that we had definitive proof of weapons of mass destruction. How many times have Cheney, Bush, Rumsfeld & their lackeys said the same thing? Whats coming out is that our satellite pics of SCUD towers - when we shared them with the UN inspections team - turned out t
*sigh* next time pay attention to the thread. The grandparent to your post refuted a statement that it takes 1100 hours for the average malaysian to earn enough money to buy a copy of Windows XP by claiming that the malaysian GDP is ~$10,000. Regardless of my grade in stats 101, I'm going to reference econ 104 and state: GDP has no relevant relationship to the wages of the average malaysian worker. Frankly, I don't know if the 1100 hour statisic that Wired used is correct. But GDP ain't the way to prove whether it is or not.
What's your point? According to the CIA World Fact Book: "The US has the largest and most technologically powerful economy in the world, with a per capita GDP of $37,800." Does that mean every man, woman, child & Gates makes $37.8K per year? (HINT: Not by a long shot.)
Try to determine their management style / personality and whether it will fit with your existing team. Until recently I worked for a startup, where an incompetent twit of a manager was forced upon us. We were snookered into hiring him - as an analyst - after which his job was changed to project manager. The development team was involved with the interview & figured we could get along with him - as an analyst. But when he became management, his MBA credentials were about all he had - no relevant real-world experience with a company in our position.
What is the role of this new manager? Strict project manager or will they be responsible for reviews, etc? Are they supposed to be a mentor? Do you respect them & their credentials? It is very, very important that now - while you still have a chance of influencing who will be your new boss - you determine if you will be able to live with them. Trust me, it sucks when you can't.
Bring our own wi-fi hardware vs. just using internet cafes & the like. Pros: having our own hardware for image storage, email composition, etc. Cons: stealing bandwidth, having to be worried about valuable equipment, maintenance hassle.
I could see the full geek-out implementation involving solar charging and a bike cam either mounted on the handle bars or on a pole on the trailer. Maybe GPS tracking. Setting this up & keeping it running for a multi-month 4 to 5 thousand mile plus ride through canada & the US could be a royal pain in the ass, but could also be a very cool way to document the trip. The question: is it worth it?
Re:Yeah, that's why I go kayaking
on
War Kayaking
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
I realize I've deviated slightly from the topic. The point I'm trying to make is that I think a lot of people really need to unplug and discover the world outside of electronics. Leaving all that stuff at home is what really enhances the experience. All you need is yourself and your kayak.
As an avid outdoor enthusiast, I agree in principle. I can't avoid, however, pointing out that they're apparently kayaking in downtown Seattle. Not exactly the great outdoors.
Slashdot Mirror
So, what happens if I have an unsecured wifi in my house & my neighbor has one in their house? Is all this stuff going to start discovering each other? If I have the new airGizmo, is my stereo going to start playing tunes from their iPod?
The questions may sound trollish, but are not intended as such. I know security can be implemented, I'm curious as to what could happen if it were not.
A permanent base is somewhat limited in the area it can explore. In all likelihood, a mobile base would also have rovers, but those rovers would travel a limited distance from the base. A permanent base would require burlier rovers for extended expeditions.
earthbound metaphor:
From your house you can travel pretty easily in the immediate are by walking, unburdened, knowing you're close to home. To go a little farther maybe you ride a bike. But there's a practical limit to how far you can go in a day & still return home for food, rest, etc. Now, if you have a motorhome, you don't quite have the same comforts as a permanent home, but you're sheltered at the end of the day - you can take off your outside clothes, sit down to take a dump, etc. With the motorhome you can still carry along the bikes to do local exploring. Sure, motorhomes break down. Permanent homes need maintenance too. The nice thing about the motorhome is you aren't confined to living next to the airport.
I think it was this line that got to the Mod:
But what do I know, my brain is already half-washed. Can somebody get me some friggin bleach so I can finish the job?
Using open source software without developing open source software would make me a greedy, self centered prick - not elitist.
I happen to agree with the argument that diversity is beneficial. Thats true at the OS level, the browser level, the hardware level, the router level, the food crop level, etc. Competition is good. Its good for the consumer in terms of lower prices & added features. Monoculture/homogenaity is a negative. Isn't it great to live in a world where if I don't like something, say MS products for example, I can pick a different one! What a concept! If I don't like Bud, I can drink Miller. Or brew my own. If I don't want to drive a Trabant, I can buy a Jeep. Or ride a motorcycle. Or walk. What a horrid world it would indeed be if I didn't like the Trabant, but my only choice was to either fix it myself or not use it.
Happy Mozilla/Netscape user. Since before there even was an IE.
A lot of developers seem to have chosen the alternative of working on Mozilla, or Linux, or a variety of other projects. Really, isn't MS big enough to fix their own problems? What's their cash reserve up to now - $50 billion? And after something like 2 years of a new focus on security the holes get bigger & the exploits arrive more quickly? And you want a bunch of volunteers - that don't have access to the source code they're trying to fix - to create temporary solutions until Microsoft gets around to it? Are you fucking kidding me?
There are many programmers who would love to do that... If they could get the source.
Gates says MS is getting faster fixing security holes.
You mean like the one they're replacing?
I don't think you're far off. I'm thinking modular base. each unit being moveable / liftable to 1) stay on top of accumulated snowfall and 2) move away from the calving edge of the ice shelf.
The other problem mentioned was the psychological impact of living under a couple tons of ice. Apparently crawling down a tunnel to live frozen underground like some kind of ice troglodyte wasn't appealing to the residents.
Why is this not +5 funny?
During the colonial period, it was typically not the colonists themselves that financed their trip to the new world. Instead, people with money, i.e. businessmen, sponsored colonists. Outfit a ship full of people looking for something new, or willing to work as indentured servants to get to the new world; give 'em all the supplies you think they'll need to survive & they agree to send home profitable goods. In those days it largely meant fur. In this respect, sponsoring people to take off into space & mine asteroids is a perfectly relevant model.
I bet you work at Wells Fargo. It blows my mind, but it looks like all their apps are browser based. Kinda makes a guy wonder why he banks there, come to think of it...
I like your summary. I've also found that, as a technologist writing code, my assessment of how a software product is written is often different from a project manager's. This happens before during and after projects - we each have our own perspective on the process & probably neither of us really understands how it will or did get done.
You have it backwards. Saddam was a participant in the War on Terror, on the side of the terrorists.
He was paying $25,000 each to the families of suicide bombers who completed their attacks.
Families of Palestinians bombing Israel, not people threatening the US. Still not cool, but also does not justify a preventative invasion by the US.
Members of Saddam's secret police were members of Al Qaeda.
Not true. According to the Washington Post & New York Times, there may be a mixup due to name similarities between some Al Queda members & the dude in the secret police.
Remember the World Trade Center bombing? Read the previous link, it is scary has hell. Iraq apparently had a hand in it and sheltered one of the plotters.
I have a hard time believing that opinionjournal.com is a definitive source on this subject. Frankly, I'd expect that it would've been covered more in mainstream press if it were true. In any case, it does not justify the war.
And then there was Iraq's plans to attack the US:
June 19, 2004 -- Russian President Vladimir Putin yesterday buttressed President Bush's claim that Iraq posed a direct threat to America by saying Russian intelligence was tipped off that Saddam Hussein was preparing anti-American attacks after 9/11.
Putin said the warning was relayed to Bush, who personally thanked one of Russia's spy chiefs for it.
The funny thing about this one is that US intelligence officials apparently don't know a thing about it! Again, cite coverage in the Washington Post & New York Times. Maybe its the insider knowledge that Cheney has, but has neglected to share with the commission investigating the 9/11 attacks on the US.
And then there are Zarqawi and Abu Nidal , two of the most blood-thirsty savages engaging in terrorism, both of whom found a home in Iraq.
You mean the guys that moved to Iraq after the US bombed the hell out of it? I think they'd still be living elsewhere if we hadn't gone in & made a mess of things.
No, I'm afraid you have it backwards, Saddam was both a participant and an enabler of terrorism. We did the right thing just based on terrorism.
So, No, you don't have it right. The US did not do the right thing by going in there 'just based on terrorism.' I humbly suggest that you consider verifying your news sources before buying the cock and bull story put out by the people continually changing their stories trying to justify an illegal and unethical war.
That is not even considering the many banned activities going on in Iraq in defiance of the UN. Read David Kay's report sometime, or some of the other UN material. For your convenience, here is an excert from his statement:
We have discovered dozens of WMD-related program activities and significant amounts of equipment that Iraq concealed from the United Nations during the inspections that began in late 2002. The discovery of these deliberate concealment efforts have come about both through the admissions of Iraqi scientists and officials concerning information they deliberately withheld and through physical evidence of equipment and activities that ISG has discovered that should have been declared to the UN. Let me just give you a few examples of these concealment efforts, some of which I will elaborate on later:
And this is what its come to; an Administration that justified a war based on stockpiles of WMD has come up with vague evidence of 'WMD programs'. As I recall, the centerfuge that was found had been buried in a scientist's back yard for 12 years. Hardly a WMD program. When Colin Powell went to the UN he claimed that we had definitive proof of weapons of mass destruction. How many times have Cheney, Bush, Rumsfeld & their lackeys said the same thing? Whats coming out is that our satellite pics of SCUD towers - when we shared them with the UN inspections team - turned out t
The Wedding Singer? Are we allowed to like and/or reference that? That was some seriously funny shit.
The difference being that, AFAIK, walmart does not offer support or service.
I have far too much respect for Mr. Melville than to compare him to George Bush. Which may have been your point, I'm not sure.
For me: no more conversations with people that misinterpred my post in the first place.
*sigh* next time pay attention to the thread. The grandparent to your post refuted a statement that it takes 1100 hours for the average malaysian to earn enough money to buy a copy of Windows XP by claiming that the malaysian GDP is ~$10,000. Regardless of my grade in stats 101, I'm going to reference econ 104 and state: GDP has no relevant relationship to the wages of the average malaysian worker. Frankly, I don't know if the 1100 hour statisic that Wired used is correct. But GDP ain't the way to prove whether it is or not.
What's your point? According to the CIA World Fact Book: "The US has the largest and most technologically powerful economy in the world, with a per capita GDP of $37,800." Does that mean every man, woman, child & Gates makes $37.8K per year? (HINT: Not by a long shot.)
At One Point, 'I Was Deathly Afraid,' New Space Visitor Admits
Try to determine their management style / personality and whether it will fit with your existing team. Until recently I worked for a startup, where an incompetent twit of a manager was forced upon us. We were snookered into hiring him - as an analyst - after which his job was changed to project manager. The development team was involved with the interview & figured we could get along with him - as an analyst. But when he became management, his MBA credentials were about all he had - no relevant real-world experience with a company in our position.
What is the role of this new manager? Strict project manager or will they be responsible for reviews, etc? Are they supposed to be a mentor? Do you respect them & their credentials? It is very, very important that now - while you still have a chance of influencing who will be your new boss - you determine if you will be able to live with them. Trust me, it sucks when you can't.
Bring our own wi-fi hardware vs. just using internet cafes & the like. Pros: having our own hardware for image storage, email composition, etc. Cons: stealing bandwidth, having to be worried about valuable equipment, maintenance hassle.
I could see the full geek-out implementation involving solar charging and a bike cam either mounted on the handle bars or on a pole on the trailer. Maybe GPS tracking. Setting this up & keeping it running for a multi-month 4 to 5 thousand mile plus ride through canada & the US could be a royal pain in the ass, but could also be a very cool way to document the trip. The question: is it worth it?
As an avid outdoor enthusiast, I agree in principle. I can't avoid, however, pointing out that they're apparently kayaking in downtown Seattle. Not exactly the great outdoors.