I wasn't trolling - sorry - I should have been clear... I was aiming for sterotypically-incorrect in a samuri-movie fashion.
I don't bear any ill will to Japanese-Americans. I don't really believe that all Japanese-Americans say things like "Greetings!" and "Honorable", all while speaking in ODD CAPITAL LETTERs. It's only Hollywood that wants me to believe this. Well, that and some of my manga. I trust Hollywood much more, though. They speak truth in every scene of every work.
To make matters worse, you matter more just for being on that list.
Yes, yes, yes - but that's not a measure of the "how much you matter" rating... it's a meta-"how much you matter" rating. The article itself creates a massive meta-relationship paradox.
So the article says Rob's not important - big deal. I RTFA and I know it slams the slash in the text, but it reality, it's a list of people. Just like the Torvalds bit, Rob isn't as important as what he created is. Basically, he's no more important to the process at slashdot today than any other moderator.
As others have already stated, what separates Slashdot from Digg is quality. The articles may be the same, similiar, delayed, dupes, whatever - but the moderated commentary from users is what makes Slashdot worth reading.
That said, Rob deserves a huge portion of credit for creating and maintaining this community. The man may be irrelevant, but the community is not.
Jack Messman... [is] going to go down in history for bringing linux to the masses
I'm sorry, but that's crap. Do you know these people? Do you follow Novell closely? If anyone deserves credit for bringing "Linux to the Masses" within Novell, it's Chris Stone, Nat Friedman, Eric Anderson, Ron Hovespian, and many others - but certainly not Jack Messman.
This may seem like a joke but I spent an hour trying to install a Flash active-X plugin on IE in XP_64 running as Adminstrator and finally gave up. The series of prompts from the OS were painfully close to the scenario presented in this "joke" post.
Yeah - I was going to go boot it up and copy the actual text in the ultra-annoying, constant stream of "As a user, you're too stupid to understand security. We need to ask you every question in existance about every OS function to ensure to completely understand the risks... and to point out exactly how secure of an OS you're really using."-popup boxes. But, I decided it wasn't worth all that effort, when the hyperbole was funnier and effective.
But, you are entirely correct - there is more than a small grain of truth in this joke!
So, it's the most secure operating system ever... and from my use of the beta, I might be tempted to believe that. Here's an example of that "security":
*insert CD*
"You've just inserted an insecure piece of removable media. Are you sure you want to proceed?" *clicks yes*
*launches Internet Exploiter*
"You are attempting to connect to the internet. The internet is a very insecure place. Are you sure you want to do?" *clicks "Yes"*
"Are you really sure? I mean, there are viruses out there on the internet. Do you know what a virus is? I mean, this stuff can really mess your computer up! Are you absolutely sure you want to connect to the internet?" *clicks "Yes"*
"Oooooh, sorry - you don't have sufficient privileges to connect to the internet. Contact your Administrator or type your Administrator password now." *types password* *connects to internet*
"You are attempting to send an IP packet over an unsecured interface. This is how viruses get on your computer. Are you sure want to send this packet?" *sighs* *clicks "Yes"*
*beep beep beep* "USER ALERT: Your computer has received an unsecured packet from the internet! This packet could be part of a virus! Are you certain you want to allow this packet into the application for processing?" *clicks "Yes."
"You are attempting to send an IP packet over an unsecured interface. This is how viruses get on your computer. Are you sure want to send this packet?" *sighs* *clicks "Yes"*
*beep beep beep* "USER ALERT: Your computer has received an unsecured packet from the internet! This packet could be part of a virus! Are you certain you want to allow this packet into the application for processing?" *kicks computer* *installs Linux/BSD or buys Mac*
VERY secure, indeed.
The Federation is a military dictatorship. Deal with it.
Look, the Federation may have been a military dicatorship, but it worked for some people...
All I'm saying is that if humans need to spread out into the galaxy to ensure the survival of the species, Will Shatner and I are ready to go out and sleep with all the alien babes it'll take to make that happen. We'll take one for the team - that's just the sort of guys we are.
And which bank would you change to? The one that's not outsourcing to India and Latin America? Every major bank in the US is outsourcing, offshoring, or expanding certain operations overseas. Tata (TCS) is one the largest firms all US companies are going with - because they have a pretty good track record in dealing with sensative, highly regulated transactions. Some of the top 10 are opening company-owned divisions overseas to ensure even better control. It all comes down to one thing: cost.
Now, I'm certain that comes as no surprise. But don't mistake what banks are offshoring with what technology companies are offshoring. I've yet to see a US bank offshore a customer support center and leave it there. Banks are typically offshoring software development, testing, quality assurance, and automated business processes (such as statement processing and generation). Even in these cases, every single process sent overseas is typically subject to a very critical eye - the bank in TFA, for example, employs the Six Sigma analysis method to evaluate the actual costs involved and ensure nothing changes for the customer.
Some banks are even taking novel approaches to lowering costs while not moving operations overseas. Several banks have moved customer support to rural areas in the US, where a lower cost of living and average wage allows the banks to employ more of the domestic workforce and still cut costs. Additionally, many banks are looking to emerging markets and growing cities for developers and knowledge workers. Take the example from TFA again - they are moving some technology operations from Concord, CA to Charlotte, NC. Do a little research on the cost of living differences in those two locations, and you'll see why many tech workers (myself included) would jump at the chance to work in a city where you can buy four to five times the home for your money.
Unfortunately, part the equation the article leaves unstated is that the particular bank in question was already planning on moving shop - when they were bought by a comptetior from the other coast. Certainly, some of the jobs are being offshored, but I suspect those jobs would have been relocated and then outsourced, anyway. Having existing employees train their replacements helps both the employee and the company, though. The employee remains employed for a longer period of time and, in this case, will receive a larger severance package. The company, of course, ensures a smooth transition managed by the people who know the processes and systems best. That also helps the employee in one important way - they are nearly all customers of the bank they work for. I, for one, would do anything I could to ensure those new folks new everything they needed - for my own financial security, if nothing else.
Sorry if I left your favorite UNIX/Linux or other OS off the list... it's been a long week, it's late on Friday, and I felt like being helpful. Besides, I couldn't find the training page for NCR's MP-RAS operating system.:)
There has already been some good feedback - get a book, put up a sandbox system of your own to try, and finally, at the end of the day, there is no substitute for real world hands-on training.
That said, I presume you work with a finite set of operating systems. In my experience, the best training courses tend to be the certification track offerings from the OS vendor. Sun, HP, IBM, Red Hat, Novell, and the others know their operating systems very well. The drawback to this approach is that most companies depend on third-party software to perform critical functions - backup/recovery, authentication, remote management, etc. No single source will typically offer formal training on your company's stack unless you have a large training organization.
That said, many large companies do have just such a large training organization that offers specialized courses on their own environment. Take advantage of that to get better at your job, but look to the vendors for more general and reusable training.
So... wait... SCO owns the elves and their magic? I knew they were smoking something, but it must be good!
Seriously, is the whole SCO strategy just sensationalism at this point? I mean, do they just put the kernel source on a dartboard, throw, and what gets hit - they own it! I can find any other rhyme or reason to this... Could be a good business plan for a whole company of attorneys.
I don't think that's correct... Most banks I know (and, as I work for a large one in a visible role in the industry, I know quite a few) have highly reliable, transaction-safe systems for tracking customer data. Additionally, there are many, many checks in place to ensure data accuracy. There's a reason all of the top 10 U.S. banks still keep all retail banking data on mainframes - it may be an outdated, outmoded platform, but it has decades of development and history. Everything has an audit log. Everything has non-repudiation.
Security, on the other hand, is only something you can control at the system level. Measures such as mandatory information security training for all employees can help, but it's still up to each employee. As in every organization, the weakest link is people - social engineering is a risk everywhere.
In the case of the worst, either way, an accuracy problem is less of an issue than a security issue, in most cases. As I stated, transactions are logged, everything can be verified. There is financial risk in cases of most accuracy problems, but they can usually be resolved with a correction and occasionally, compensation of potential loss to the customer. In the cases of security compromise - loss of customer data, malicious modification of transactions, theft, etc. - the risks are much higher. Reputation risk, loss of customer confidence, or worse - serious instability in the country's and the world's economy. There is no tranaction log for information theft.
Please don't misunderstand me - both are very serious situations. The difference is, we can expect and avoid accuracy problem from years of experience and process. New information and computing security risks arise all the time. Banking transactions today are almost identical to what they were 25 years ago - just digital. No one even thought of USB drives with trojans on them 5 years ago.
After all these back-and-forth stories in the press, I imagine that Novell is pretty ticked at Lenovo around SLED 10. I mean, at the end of the day, it'll still be more sales - but not what it could have been. I think Linux-consumer confidence in Lenovo probably isn't very high now.
And that's sad, really, because Lenovo bundling/installing/supporting SLED would have been a big win for Novell and Linux on the desktop in general. Now it almost seems like an apology.
While I'm certainly no fan of the Windows family of operating systems on desktops or servers (or PDAs, for that matter), I've recently found myself appreciating a Windows Embedded product. When I bought a new Honda in November, I fell in love with the navigation system - so much so that when I sought to purchase another new vehicle last month, the nav system was a requirement.
After some research and discussion, I was dishearted to find that the navigation systems I had grown to love so much were actually powered by Windows Automotive Edition - based on Windows Embedded, which is a flavor of Windows CE. While I cannot actually tell (by any means) that the system is Windows-based, it is very stable, responsive, fast, and user friendly - most of which is probably of function of the application and not the operating system.
All that said, I'm still psyched about CE 6 if it provides further media access features, hardware drivers, and other niceitys.
I have real pain saying I'm psyched about a Windows product as a Linux and Mac OS geek!:) But, if it helps me get a better navigation system, I'll sell my soul to Redmond.
Suddenly it all makes sense!!!
on
Faking a Company
·
· Score: 2, Funny
This is exactly what Microsoft did to IBM's PC software division in the 80's!
I always knew there was *something* underhanded there, but couldn't put my finger on it.... ^_^ Contract, schwantract.... No company, not even IBM, could have been that stupid. It was all just "Corporation Piracy".
It all makes sense... DOS, CP/M, and, of course, once MS had made enough money from the theft they started taking less and less of IBM's assest - with the last partial theft in the Windows 95 + OS/2 Warp releases... from there, Microsoft could just keep heaping "original" code onto the DOS codebase it secreted away.
Ahhh, all is right in the world when everything finally falls into place!
(Disclaimer: This is a joke. Sarcasm. Humor, people. We all know the real facts..... or do we???)
How could you unleash the terror that is these lasers into the hands of the Slashdot community??? There's a laser on that site that is visible 120 miles away, without assistance... Dangerous in the hands of the average reader!
And I'm sure there's some wacko on here with the $2000 of disposable income that'll run out an buy to aim at planes... (as is *EXPLICTLY* prohibited on the website - and in US law.)
I'm such a moron... I can't believe I entirely forgot about a great piece of Linux photo management software - F-Spot! Larry Ewing (of Tux fame) has been working on it for some time for Novell.
Just a quick note - I never recommended Linux specifically, just not Windows.
For my amateur stock photography work, I use iPhoto to manage my photo library on Mac OS X, and (while I don't have 15,000 photos) I have no problems managing what is currently 7,200+ photos. But, I don't know the product you mentioned (at all), so it may be a poor substitute. I know iPhoto is not a professional-grade tool, but it more than meets all my library management and basic manipulation needs - everything else gets pushed to Photoshop (by iPhoto!).
I actually said both... (sheepish grin) But, then, I did mean both. I would be all about choice in technology, including Windows, if Microsoft was playing ball. Someone in another branch of this thread mentioned IBM's patent library being even larger than Microsoft's - the difference is IBM is trying to build bridges, where Microsoft wants to the only one with a boat. IBM has never once threatened an open source project, and freely enters into cross-licensing agreements with peers in the commerical sector. Microsoft, on the other hand, continues to rattle the saber. How many web servers need to run Apache on Linux before Microsoft gets too scared? How many desktops need to move from Windows to SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop before Microsoft makes good on those threats?
So, yes - short term - at least, it is about making life difficult for Microsoft users by whatever means necessary. Whatever it takes to cut off the cash flow that feeds this problem. IMHO, that is what will enable the greatest choice, long term.
Slashdot Mirror
I wasn't trolling - sorry - I should have been clear... I was aiming for sterotypically-incorrect in a samuri-movie fashion.
I don't bear any ill will to Japanese-Americans. I don't really believe that all Japanese-Americans say things like "Greetings!" and "Honorable", all while speaking in ODD CAPITAL LETTERs. It's only Hollywood that wants me to believe this. Well, that and some of my manga. I trust Hollywood much more, though. They speak truth in every scene of every work.
See, you can find out more about this novel concept here....
Wait, wait, wait - we're not supposed to trust Japanese-Americans?
See - this proves one of my earlier points...
Slashdot: The Largest Collection of Star Trek Nerds on the Internet
(Present company included!)
Yes, yes, yes - but that's not a measure of the "how much you matter" rating... it's a meta-"how much you matter" rating. The article itself creates a massive meta-relationship paradox.
So the article says Rob's not important - big deal. I RTFA and I know it slams the slash in the text, but it reality, it's a list of people. Just like the Torvalds bit, Rob isn't as important as what he created is. Basically, he's no more important to the process at slashdot today than any other moderator.
As others have already stated, what separates Slashdot from Digg is quality. The articles may be the same, similiar, delayed, dupes, whatever - but the moderated commentary from users is what makes Slashdot worth reading.
That said, Rob deserves a huge portion of credit for creating and maintaining this community. The man may be irrelevant, but the community is not.
I'm sorry, but that's crap. Do you know these people? Do you follow Novell closely? If anyone deserves credit for bringing "Linux to the Masses" within Novell, it's Chris Stone, Nat Friedman, Eric Anderson, Ron Hovespian, and many others - but certainly not Jack Messman.
I think you meant to say "NDS for Symbian", not Sybian. Although it is much funnier your way.
All I can say is that you hit the nail squarely on the head. If I had some mod points right now, I'd be calling this the most insightful post yet.
Yeah - I was going to go boot it up and copy the actual text in the ultra-annoying, constant stream of "As a user, you're too stupid to understand security. We need to ask you every question in existance about every OS function to ensure to completely understand the risks... and to point out exactly how secure of an OS you're really using."-popup boxes. But, I decided it wasn't worth all that effort, when the hyperbole was funnier and effective.
But, you are entirely correct - there is more than a small grain of truth in this joke!
So, it's the most secure operating system ever... and from my use of the beta, I might be tempted to believe that. Here's an example of that "security": *insert CD*
"You've just inserted an insecure piece of removable media. Are you sure you want to proceed?"
*clicks yes*
*launches Internet Exploiter*
"You are attempting to connect to the internet. The internet is a very insecure place. Are you sure you want to do?"
*clicks "Yes"*
"Are you really sure? I mean, there are viruses out there on the internet. Do you know what a virus is? I mean, this stuff can really mess your computer up! Are you absolutely sure you want to connect to the internet?"
*clicks "Yes"*
"Oooooh, sorry - you don't have sufficient privileges to connect to the internet. Contact your Administrator or type your Administrator password now."
*types password*
*connects to internet*
"You are attempting to send an IP packet over an unsecured interface. This is how viruses get on your computer. Are you sure want to send this packet?"
*sighs* *clicks "Yes"*
*beep beep beep* "USER ALERT: Your computer has received an unsecured packet from the internet! This packet could be part of a virus! Are you certain you want to allow this packet into the application for processing?"
*clicks "Yes."
"You are attempting to send an IP packet over an unsecured interface. This is how viruses get on your computer. Are you sure want to send this packet?"
*sighs* *clicks "Yes"*
*beep beep beep* "USER ALERT: Your computer has received an unsecured packet from the internet! This packet could be part of a virus! Are you certain you want to allow this packet into the application for processing?"
*kicks computer*
*installs Linux/BSD or buys Mac*
VERY secure, indeed.
Look, the Federation may have been a military dicatorship, but it worked for some people...
All I'm saying is that if humans need to spread out into the galaxy to ensure the survival of the species, Will Shatner and I are ready to go out and sleep with all the alien babes it'll take to make that happen. We'll take one for the team - that's just the sort of guys we are.
Time to change banks?
And which bank would you change to? The one that's not outsourcing to India and Latin America? Every major bank in the US is outsourcing, offshoring, or expanding certain operations overseas. Tata (TCS) is one the largest firms all US companies are going with - because they have a pretty good track record in dealing with sensative, highly regulated transactions. Some of the top 10 are opening company-owned divisions overseas to ensure even better control. It all comes down to one thing: cost.
Now, I'm certain that comes as no surprise. But don't mistake what banks are offshoring with what technology companies are offshoring. I've yet to see a US bank offshore a customer support center and leave it there. Banks are typically offshoring software development, testing, quality assurance, and automated business processes (such as statement processing and generation). Even in these cases, every single process sent overseas is typically subject to a very critical eye - the bank in TFA, for example, employs the Six Sigma analysis method to evaluate the actual costs involved and ensure nothing changes for the customer.
Some banks are even taking novel approaches to lowering costs while not moving operations overseas. Several banks have moved customer support to rural areas in the US, where a lower cost of living and average wage allows the banks to employ more of the domestic workforce and still cut costs. Additionally, many banks are looking to emerging markets and growing cities for developers and knowledge workers. Take the example from TFA again - they are moving some technology operations from Concord, CA to Charlotte, NC. Do a little research on the cost of living differences in those two locations, and you'll see why many tech workers (myself included) would jump at the chance to work in a city where you can buy four to five times the home for your money.
Unfortunately, part the equation the article leaves unstated is that the particular bank in question was already planning on moving shop - when they were bought by a comptetior from the other coast. Certainly, some of the jobs are being offshored, but I suspect those jobs would have been relocated and then outsourced, anyway. Having existing employees train their replacements helps both the employee and the company, though. The employee remains employed for a longer period of time and, in this case, will receive a larger severance package. The company, of course, ensures a smooth transition managed by the people who know the processes and systems best. That also helps the employee in one important way - they are nearly all customers of the bank they work for. I, for one, would do anything I could to ensure those new folks new everything they needed - for my own financial security, if nothing else.
Sorry if I left your favorite UNIX/Linux or other OS off the list... it's been a long week, it's late on Friday, and I felt like being helpful. Besides, I couldn't find the training page for NCR's MP-RAS operating system.
There has already been some good feedback - get a book, put up a sandbox system of your own to try, and finally, at the end of the day, there is no substitute for real world hands-on training.
That said, I presume you work with a finite set of operating systems. In my experience, the best training courses tend to be the certification track offerings from the OS vendor. Sun, HP, IBM, Red Hat, Novell, and the others know their operating systems very well. The drawback to this approach is that most companies depend on third-party software to perform critical functions - backup/recovery, authentication, remote management, etc. No single source will typically offer formal training on your company's stack unless you have a large training organization.
That said, many large companies do have just such a large training organization that offers specialized courses on their own environment. Take advantage of that to get better at your job, but look to the vendors for more general and reusable training.
So... wait... SCO owns the elves and their magic? I knew they were smoking something, but it must be good!
Seriously, is the whole SCO strategy just sensationalism at this point? I mean, do they just put the kernel source on a dartboard, throw, and what gets hit - they own it! I can find any other rhyme or reason to this... Could be a good business plan for a whole company of attorneys.
I don't think that's correct... Most banks I know (and, as I work for a large one in a visible role in the industry, I know quite a few) have highly reliable, transaction-safe systems for tracking customer data. Additionally, there are many, many checks in place to ensure data accuracy. There's a reason all of the top 10 U.S. banks still keep all retail banking data on mainframes - it may be an outdated, outmoded platform, but it has decades of development and history. Everything has an audit log. Everything has non-repudiation.
Security, on the other hand, is only something you can control at the system level. Measures such as mandatory information security training for all employees can help, but it's still up to each employee. As in every organization, the weakest link is people - social engineering is a risk everywhere.
In the case of the worst, either way, an accuracy problem is less of an issue than a security issue, in most cases. As I stated, transactions are logged, everything can be verified. There is financial risk in cases of most accuracy problems, but they can usually be resolved with a correction and occasionally, compensation of potential loss to the customer. In the cases of security compromise - loss of customer data, malicious modification of transactions, theft, etc. - the risks are much higher. Reputation risk, loss of customer confidence, or worse - serious instability in the country's and the world's economy. There is no tranaction log for information theft.
Please don't misunderstand me - both are very serious situations. The difference is, we can expect and avoid accuracy problem from years of experience and process. New information and computing security risks arise all the time. Banking transactions today are almost identical to what they were 25 years ago - just digital. No one even thought of USB drives with trojans on them 5 years ago.
After all these back-and-forth stories in the press, I imagine that Novell is pretty ticked at Lenovo around SLED 10. I mean, at the end of the day, it'll still be more sales - but not what it could have been. I think Linux-consumer confidence in Lenovo probably isn't very high now.
And that's sad, really, because Lenovo bundling/installing/supporting SLED would have been a big win for Novell and Linux on the desktop in general. Now it almost seems like an apology.
While I'm certainly no fan of the Windows family of operating systems on desktops or servers (or PDAs, for that matter), I've recently found myself appreciating a Windows Embedded product. When I bought a new Honda in November, I fell in love with the navigation system - so much so that when I sought to purchase another new vehicle last month, the nav system was a requirement.
:) But, if it helps me get a better navigation system, I'll sell my soul to Redmond.
After some research and discussion, I was dishearted to find that the navigation systems I had grown to love so much were actually powered by Windows Automotive Edition - based on Windows Embedded, which is a flavor of Windows CE. While I cannot actually tell (by any means) that the system is Windows-based, it is very stable, responsive, fast, and user friendly - most of which is probably of function of the application and not the operating system.
All that said, I'm still psyched about CE 6 if it provides further media access features, hardware drivers, and other niceitys.
I have real pain saying I'm psyched about a Windows product as a Linux and Mac OS geek!
This is exactly what Microsoft did to IBM's PC software division in the 80's!
I always knew there was *something* underhanded there, but couldn't put my finger on it.... ^_^ Contract, schwantract.... No company, not even IBM, could have been that stupid. It was all just "Corporation Piracy".
It all makes sense... DOS, CP/M, and, of course, once MS had made enough money from the theft they started taking less and less of IBM's assest - with the last partial theft in the Windows 95 + OS/2 Warp releases... from there, Microsoft could just keep heaping "original" code onto the DOS codebase it secreted away.
Ahhh, all is right in the world when everything finally falls into place!
(Disclaimer: This is a joke. Sarcasm. Humor, people. We all know the real facts..... or do we???)
Oh, god - what kind of an idiot are you?
How could you unleash the terror that is these lasers into the hands of the Slashdot community??? There's a laser on that site that is visible 120 miles away, without assistance... Dangerous in the hands of the average reader!
And I'm sure there's some wacko on here with the $2000 of disposable income that'll run out an buy to aim at planes... (as is *EXPLICTLY* prohibited on the website - and in US law.)
I'm such a moron... I can't believe I entirely forgot about a great piece of Linux photo management software - F-Spot! Larry Ewing (of Tux fame) has been working on it for some time for Novell.
It looks to be an iPhoto work-alike for Linux.
Yep - iPhoto does allow tagging and boolean tag searches. But, then as you say - migrating would probably be a huge pain in the ass.
BTW - the newest version (6) supports libraries of up to 250,000 images.
Hmm. Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
Seriously.
(I couldn't help myself...)
Just a quick note - I never recommended Linux specifically, just not Windows.
For my amateur stock photography work, I use iPhoto to manage my photo library on Mac OS X, and (while I don't have 15,000 photos) I have no problems managing what is currently 7,200+ photos. But, I don't know the product you mentioned (at all), so it may be a poor substitute. I know iPhoto is not a professional-grade tool, but it more than meets all my library management and basic manipulation needs - everything else gets pushed to Photoshop (by iPhoto!).
I actually said both... (sheepish grin) But, then, I did mean both. I would be all about choice in technology, including Windows, if Microsoft was playing ball. Someone in another branch of this thread mentioned IBM's patent library being even larger than Microsoft's - the difference is IBM is trying to build bridges, where Microsoft wants to the only one with a boat. IBM has never once threatened an open source project, and freely enters into cross-licensing agreements with peers in the commerical sector. Microsoft, on the other hand, continues to rattle the saber. How many web servers need to run Apache on Linux before Microsoft gets too scared? How many desktops need to move from Windows to SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop before Microsoft makes good on those threats?
So, yes - short term - at least, it is about making life difficult for Microsoft users by whatever means necessary. Whatever it takes to cut off the cash flow that feeds this problem. IMHO, that is what will enable the greatest choice, long term.