Well, it's easy to diss someone that you don't know. From one blog post, you assume that you know everything about her?
It tells us quite a bit about what she has written in the blog post - which is far more than I want to know about her and does not impress at all. It's not exactly very professional is it? It looks like she has a very different idea of what her job is to what the customers think her job is. The message along the lines of "report the bug and we send in the lawyers", presented with various casual crap about mystery writing and hiphop analogies doesn't look so good to me and IMHO deserved criticism.
They don't need to know anything about security and programming; they need to know about management
They need to know enough about a topic to be able to know what questions to ask their experts otherwise they are not fit to be anything other than an administrative assistant to someone who does. Not having enough background leads to stupid and expensive mistakes.
One in a company I worked for, who "knew about management", was put in charge of a non-destructive testing division. He failed to consider that industrial radiography requires clearing people from the immediate area so on busy work sites it is typically done at night, or at least at times when a clear area can be scheduled. He cost tens of thousands of dollars on a single quote due to that and refused ongoing work, losing customers with decades on the books, just because a lack of any background in the field resulted in scheduling errors. He could have asked for help but that "only need to know about management" thing can also mean a desire not to show weakness. The company was too small to support his long list of mistakes and the previously profitable NDT section was gone, the manager with it, in less than six months. He was actually a nice guy, a good "salesman", and could manage things he could understand (apart from getting rid of established clients instead of finding a way to keep the long revenue stream going - I've got no idea why he couldn't understand that they would go elsewhere) - but way out of his depth meant that he was just shark bait.
So in a technical environment your manager without the basics is just hoping that there are no sharks going past before they learn how to see them.
It seems like much of her frustration is from people blindly running static analysis tools on their code, finding false-positive vulns,
She's not happy about the true positives either - don't look at our stuff if it bugs out is the message she is sending here.
If the vendors I buy stupidly expensive stuff from starting acting that way I would inform them where they could put their lawyers and go looking for another vendor. I've had to reverse engineer some buggy commercial software on several occasions to find workarounds so that users can get stuff done, and have informed the vendor, who then informed their other customers (known problems list), fixed it or both.
Mostly, it's about checking boxes on a job application: and for web "designers," Photoshop is often one of the boxes.
You do have a bit of a point yet I pity you. Once you actually get the job the checked box isn't going to help much if you do not understand what you are doing. The main point is for the student to know what they are doing so that they can do the job even if the GUI is unfamiliar - which is going to happen at some point anyway. Being destined to be laid off when Photoshop 2016 comes up due to rote learning the way to use the GUI in the current product is not what you want in your student's future.
Why does it matter? For example - more than 80% of what I learned in using AutoCAD in 1989 applies to the current version. Features get added but the core functions vary little between versions of long lasting software. It's about teaching students an approach instead of navigating a twisty GUI that is likely to change.
there are 20 out there who think they could handle a project like this because they installed Ubuntu on their laptop and set up an FTP server for their friends to share things
And they are probably correct. The requirements are not hard here.
Do you have someone who can maintain a linux installation of that size?
FFS I could do it with a pile of knoppix CDROMS. In the year 2000 or any time later. Give it a couple of weekends and you could too if you can't already. It's about providing a suite of applications, a machine to run them on, and somewhere to save them. Something like knoppix is ideal for that because they can take it home and run it on other stuff without changing the base OS.
It got renamed and an extra digit added to the end of the costs per seat.
So why not just provide connectivity, and have students supply their own machines and own software
That's only going to work at the top end of the market at which point they probably expect the school to supply a lot as well and would not like the idea, so there goes a pile of potential students from that constraint. It's all very libertarian of you but reality bites.
doesn't realize that major FOSS software like GIMP are undergoing quiet, continuous improvements and upgrades.
Wow, you're right. I didn't realize that GIMP finally supports color spaces. If they keep this up, soon they'll be feature-equivalent with Photoshop CS3.
Which is probably the version of photoshop used to teach students on MS Windows boxes anyway. The latest and greatest is both unlikely and not necessary when you want to point out concepts instead of rote learning of how to use a GUI that is going to change soon anyway.
Does it matter so long as it comes with the libraries it needs? I'm using a dotnet geosciences thing on linux that works (and was tested by the vendor) with mono and it does the job. Just being able to run on the platform is often enough, in this case it avoids hot-seating with a single licence and an occasionally used thing. Yes there is RDP but that means a dedicated MS server box, annoying, confusing, expensive licencing and the entire desktop exported instead of a window like on X. Yes RDP can theoretically work like X, only there always seems to be something stopping it when reality gets in the way (eg. buying the gold plated third party RDP that MIGHT work).
Sorry about the long rant, but if it runs IMHO that's 99% of the struggle. There's another application used here (seisee) that runs very well in wine and was tested by the vendor in wine. It works, it's fast, the only thing making it inferior to a full native port is that it doesn't use the native linux font system so cyrillic doesn't show up by default - not a big deal if everyone in the workplace can read English and only one can make sense of cyrillic
The software licencing is going to cost as much or more than that nice hardware unless you can get some sort of discount on CAL and RDS licenses. The 1999 solution for the requirements above is a bunch of desktops with linux on them and it's far more compelling, far more capable with an even larger price difference now.
Remember folks - it's teaching not training. If it's in a workplace that already has a pile of people using photoshop in production and you have somebody already taught to draw that's one thing, but this is about teaching people concepts not a production workflow. They can learn about layers etc via any of dozens of programs.
That gets very expensive if done legally with current MS Server software. There are third party programs that will let you use Win7 quite legally - but either way, it's a waste of time and money when a knoppix CD provides the tools needed to teach web design and you can legally hand them out in class.
Why exactly would running Windows VMs be so difficult?
Because you have to keep track of all the licences and make sure they are paid for. Why bother when the entire point is to teach people to do things that can be done without the trouble and without encouraging software piracy (ok then - copyright infringement)?
For teaching purposes you only have to mention that it's a good idea to have at least one windows system for testing so you can see what your web app is gonna look like on it.
So? It's about learning to draw not steer through the menu of a GUI on an expensive program that's going to have a different GUI in a year or two anyway. It's not for glossy magazine images - the niche gold plated features do not matter when you want a small image that will download quickly.
I saved you the trouble of googling - move down to the heading "Be Careful of Links" to see where the problem still lies: http://www.howtogeek.com/13554...
Clicking on the wrong link will helpfully open IE which will then helpfully run the script that installs and runs cryptolocker - hence the problem discussed here! In news reports it has been links that are supposed to be about speeding fines, parcel tracking and tax refunds. I've seen a couple where the link said "here is your invoice", and the sort of people that are responsible for making sure you get paid the correct amount are the sort of people who fall for that one click infection.
A workaround is that antivirus companies are now providing web proxies so they can block IE getting the one click infection (or two click for everything else), but it's hard to keep the list of malware sites up to date with the number of malware bots multiplying out there
Yes It's a malware swamp beyond the dreams of bad SF out there. Hundreds of new "owned" systems are trying to break into my network daily before being blacklisted, not to mention thousands of spam messages from spambots, and that's just one IP address on the net that the script kiddies don't know from any other. Systems that are actually being targeted have to deal with far more.
You're telling me that Outlook or IE actually runs an executable with no additional warnings? I'm sorry, but unless you show me some proof of that, I find it incredibly hard to believe.
Wow! I'm not sure why you are commenting on this thread since you don't know of the most complained about problem with MS Outlook. I suggest you google it and whatever article on an antivirus site that turns up looks as if it's the most interesting. It's big business building a third party wrapper around MS Outlook to provide additional warnings, but even then there are still holes that the malware writers exploit.
It's probably even in the article above - one click to infect has been the problem with many cryptolocker type viruses.
As for posting a link to a video, I know you mean to be helpful but that is very annoying for several reasons - text of some form is much better especially if you are attempting to "educate" someone who already knows the topic better than yourself.
I mean... how many millions of bad examples does someone need before they start taking this more seriously?
Millions of bad examples to people like us that pay attention to computers, but the first one to secretarial staff who do not. Better spam filtering has just led to people who don't understand that there is a deluge of shit flooding the internet, so they trust the bits that float through. I had one today that opened up a very suspicious email in MS Outlook just so that they could send me a screenshot of it (aaargh!). Luckily that one required actually opening an attachment before it would do any damage, but with others just opening the email is game over.
Yes, the live tiles just told me that some woman lost 11 pounds due to some simple trick - WTF is that shit doing on a computer supposed to be used in a workplace? To make it usable instead of a distraction there is a relatively plain and ordinary desktop GUI that it can be switched to.
Your list of several convoluted methods makes my point - mine is just another to add to the your list of consequences of a removed start menu and no easy access to "control panel" any more.
Now that's just pathetic - modded down for pointing out the vector of infection by some fanboy that wants to pretend even MS products being discontinued are perfect. There is nothing inaccurate in the above post. Not liking reality is no reason to mod down a post describing reality.
Slashdot Mirror
It tells us quite a bit about what she has written in the blog post - which is far more than I want to know about her and does not impress at all. It's not exactly very professional is it? It looks like she has a very different idea of what her job is to what the customers think her job is. The message along the lines of "report the bug and we send in the lawyers", presented with various casual crap about mystery writing and hiphop analogies doesn't look so good to me and IMHO deserved criticism.
They need to know enough about a topic to be able to know what questions to ask their experts otherwise they are not fit to be anything other than an administrative assistant to someone who does. Not having enough background leads to stupid and expensive mistakes.
One in a company I worked for, who "knew about management", was put in charge of a non-destructive testing division. He failed to consider that industrial radiography requires clearing people from the immediate area so on busy work sites it is typically done at night, or at least at times when a clear area can be scheduled. He cost tens of thousands of dollars on a single quote due to that and refused ongoing work, losing customers with decades on the books, just because a lack of any background in the field resulted in scheduling errors. He could have asked for help but that "only need to know about management" thing can also mean a desire not to show weakness. The company was too small to support his long list of mistakes and the previously profitable NDT section was gone, the manager with it, in less than six months. He was actually a nice guy, a good "salesman", and could manage things he could understand (apart from getting rid of established clients instead of finding a way to keep the long revenue stream going - I've got no idea why he couldn't understand that they would go elsewhere) - but way out of his depth meant that he was just shark bait.
So in a technical environment your manager without the basics is just hoping that there are no sharks going past before they learn how to see them.
She's not happy about the true positives either - don't look at our stuff if it bugs out is the message she is sending here.
If the vendors I buy stupidly expensive stuff from starting acting that way I would inform them where they could put their lawyers and go looking for another vendor. I've had to reverse engineer some buggy commercial software on several occasions to find workarounds so that users can get stuff done, and have informed the vendor, who then informed their other customers (known problems list), fixed it or both.
Mostly, it's about checking boxes on a job application: and for web "designers," Photoshop is often one of the boxes.
You do have a bit of a point yet I pity you. Once you actually get the job the checked box isn't going to help much if you do not understand what you are doing.
The main point is for the student to know what they are doing so that they can do the job even if the GUI is unfamiliar - which is going to happen at some point anyway. Being destined to be laid off when Photoshop 2016 comes up due to rote learning the way to use the GUI in the current product is not what you want in your student's future.
Why does it matter? For example - more than 80% of what I learned in using AutoCAD in 1989 applies to the current version. Features get added but the core functions vary little between versions of long lasting software.
It's about teaching students an approach instead of navigating a twisty GUI that is likely to change.
And they are probably correct. The requirements are not hard here.
FFS I could do it with a pile of knoppix CDROMS. In the year 2000 or any time later. Give it a couple of weekends and you could too if you can't already.
It's about providing a suite of applications, a machine to run them on, and somewhere to save them. Something like knoppix is ideal for that because they can take it home and run it on other stuff without changing the base OS.
It got renamed and an extra digit added to the end of the costs per seat.
That's only going to work at the top end of the market at which point they probably expect the school to supply a lot as well and would not like the idea, so there goes a pile of potential students from that constraint. It's all very libertarian of you but reality bites.
doesn't realize that major FOSS software like GIMP are undergoing quiet, continuous improvements and upgrades.
Wow, you're right. I didn't realize that GIMP finally supports color spaces. If they keep this up, soon they'll be feature-equivalent with Photoshop CS3.
Which is probably the version of photoshop used to teach students on MS Windows boxes anyway. The latest and greatest is both unlikely and not necessary when you want to point out concepts instead of rote learning of how to use a GUI that is going to change soon anyway.
Does it matter so long as it comes with the libraries it needs? I'm using a dotnet geosciences thing on linux that works (and was tested by the vendor) with mono and it does the job. Just being able to run on the platform is often enough, in this case it avoids hot-seating with a single licence and an occasionally used thing. Yes there is RDP but that means a dedicated MS server box, annoying, confusing, expensive licencing and the entire desktop exported instead of a window like on X. Yes RDP can theoretically work like X, only there always seems to be something stopping it when reality gets in the way (eg. buying the gold plated third party RDP that MIGHT work).
Sorry about the long rant, but if it runs IMHO that's 99% of the struggle. There's another application used here (seisee) that runs very well in wine and was tested by the vendor in wine. It works, it's fast, the only thing making it inferior to a full native port is that it doesn't use the native linux font system so cyrillic doesn't show up by default - not a big deal if everyone in the workplace can read English and only one can make sense of cyrillic
The software licencing is going to cost as much or more than that nice hardware unless you can get some sort of discount on CAL and RDS licenses.
The 1999 solution for the requirements above is a bunch of desktops with linux on them and it's far more compelling, far more capable with an even larger price difference now.
Remember folks - it's teaching not training. If it's in a workplace that already has a pile of people using photoshop in production and you have somebody already taught to draw that's one thing, but this is about teaching people concepts not a production workflow. They can learn about layers etc via any of dozens of programs.
That gets very expensive if done legally with current MS Server software. There are third party programs that will let you use Win7 quite legally - but either way, it's a waste of time and money when a knoppix CD provides the tools needed to teach web design and you can legally hand them out in class.
Because you have to keep track of all the licences and make sure they are paid for. Why bother when the entire point is to teach people to do things that can be done without the trouble and without encouraging software piracy (ok then - copyright infringement)?
For teaching purposes you only have to mention that it's a good idea to have at least one windows system for testing so you can see what your web app is gonna look like on it.
If the students are creating original content instead of playing with an image that has been through photoshop it is not going to matter.
So? It's about learning to draw not steer through the menu of a GUI on an expensive program that's going to have a different GUI in a year or two anyway. It's not for glossy magazine images - the niche gold plated features do not matter when you want a small image that will download quickly.
I saved you the trouble of googling - move down to the heading "Be Careful of Links" to see where the problem still lies:
http://www.howtogeek.com/13554...
Clicking on the wrong link will helpfully open IE which will then helpfully run the script that installs and runs cryptolocker - hence the problem discussed here!
In news reports it has been links that are supposed to be about speeding fines, parcel tracking and tax refunds. I've seen a couple where the link said "here is your invoice", and the sort of people that are responsible for making sure you get paid the correct amount are the sort of people who fall for that one click infection.
A workaround is that antivirus companies are now providing web proxies so they can block IE getting the one click infection (or two click for everything else), but it's hard to keep the list of malware sites up to date with the number of malware bots multiplying out there
Yes
It's a malware swamp beyond the dreams of bad SF out there. Hundreds of new "owned" systems are trying to break into my network daily before being blacklisted, not to mention thousands of spam messages from spambots, and that's just one IP address on the net that the script kiddies don't know from any other. Systems that are actually being targeted have to deal with far more.
Wow!
I'm not sure why you are commenting on this thread since you don't know of the most complained about problem with MS Outlook. I suggest you google it and whatever article on an antivirus site that turns up looks as if it's the most interesting. It's big business building a third party wrapper around MS Outlook to provide additional warnings, but even then there are still holes that the malware writers exploit.
It's probably even in the article above - one click to infect has been the problem with many cryptolocker type viruses.
As for posting a link to a video, I know you mean to be helpful but that is very annoying for several reasons - text of some form is much better especially if you are attempting to "educate" someone who already knows the topic better than yourself.
Millions of bad examples to people like us that pay attention to computers, but the first one to secretarial staff who do not. Better spam filtering has just led to people who don't understand that there is a deluge of shit flooding the internet, so they trust the bits that float through. I had one today that opened up a very suspicious email in MS Outlook just so that they could send me a screenshot of it (aaargh!). Luckily that one required actually opening an attachment before it would do any damage, but with others just opening the email is game over.
It's at the top of the post - the portion quoted.
Yes, the live tiles just told me that some woman lost 11 pounds due to some simple trick - WTF is that shit doing on a computer supposed to be used in a workplace?
To make it usable instead of a distraction there is a relatively plain and ordinary desktop GUI that it can be switched to.
Your list of several convoluted methods makes my point - mine is just another to add to the your list of consequences of a removed start menu and no easy access to "control panel" any more.
Now that's just pathetic - modded down for pointing out the vector of infection by some fanboy that wants to pretend even MS products being discontinued are perfect.
There is nothing inaccurate in the above post. Not liking reality is no reason to mod down a post describing reality.
In Australia we call them waiters, and no, I like the girls too much to be interested.