Scanned images of pages to PDFs rather than say a Word or Excel (or compatible) that one could lift the data (i.e numbers) from and run your own analysis. I don't know about your copy of Adobe Reader but mine doesn't do a good job of taking a data table and putting it into a spreadsheet with rows & columns. Perhaps the full-up Adobe does better.
About right on the cost. Can you imagine the infrastructure to support all this data? Unless of course they reference it in place which brings up all sorts of security questions. Knowing how fast the Government works, the data may be obsolete before posting and who says WHAT data gets posted. All data is not relevant data. And will it be posted in a usable format for "slicing and dicing" or will it be PDFs of the data?
The invasion won't be via mass armed invasion of a whole continent but rather via more subtle economic and political means and winning the battle with as little military combat as possible, but the THREAT of force if they don't cave in.
Nukes in a suitcase are terror weapons and terror can be a psychological strategy. To that extent they are still strategic weapons just the deployment ands use is different. Some older tactics have changed but in some cases they still work, reference the mass invasion of Iraq. It's a case by case basis on what works, the concepts are valid just the options to apply the concepts are limited.
the "old tactics of war" are still quite useful and are actually quite old. Go read Sun Tsu or Clausewitz sometime and you'll find the ideas of "insurgency" which you call "modern" is quite ancient. These "old tactics" are still taught in the Military Academies around the world so they must be still pertinent and useful.
The tactics (for the most part) have NOT changed at the level that is GI Joe's concern it's just the weapons used in execution of such tactics are much more powerful and deadly and don't always require close contact with the enemy. Even as late as the Iraq War "old tactics" such as masssive bombing raids, uses of infantry and armor for house-to-house combat, snipers, etc. were still used to great effect just as in WWII
FYI,In military terms nukes are a strategic weapon not a tactical weapon. And even so, strategy involving nukes is now close to 60 yrs old (young by military standards) and is NOT going away.
Thinking nations will give up nukes just because Obama says so and promises the USA will is a very foolish notion. The only way to accomplish that is for every nuclear nation to verify in person on site that every weapon is destroyed worldwide. Even the US and Russians had a hard time with this in the SALT talks. Just relying on someone's word or satellite/spy plane photos is not enough.
yep, seems it takes about 60.."Today, more than 60 network and solution providers currently within the Telx Interconnection facility at 2323 Bryan Street"..
I've been in the other MUCH LARGER facility on Stemmons Freeway when I worked for Sun. It's a very large facility, 1000's of racks. Used to be a different name which is why I didn't clue in.
All good points, and I guess if they trash the boxes looking for the data they 1) won't find it and 2) they don't pay for the damage. If they didn't take any SAN and any networking gear to rebuild the topology, they'll be back for that stuff you can bet on it. The video I saw was of agents carry 1U and 2U servers out to a white truck, at least they should have had sense to forklift out a whole rack.
As I understand it the FBI and CIA both have a strong need for highly talented US CITIZEN computer systems experts. Of course, the pay sucks and you have to work in Washington, DC which double sucks.
I happen to live in Dallas and the local news showed them removing van loads of servers from the building so it was more than just a few ( no idea how many were actually in the building) so the FBI didn't execute on a tightly targeted warrant. FBI LIE to get what they wanted..NEVER..;)
But wouldn't it have been easier to just take the data center down, cut the external connections to the backbones and analyze in place? Find the offending box, yank it out of the rack, trash any backups of that server and let the rest go.
Unless this was a very shady ISP, with some sort of connections to the Wolverine "theft" normally an ISP has no knowledge about content and no control over the content on the servers, they just manage the hardware. Yes I know that you must promise not to do certain thing on their boxen but how would the know what you are hosting? Of course it the traffic to IP A.B.C.D all of a sudden takes a 100X jump you would think they might to check into that or maybe not if it's a nice big over the allocated bandwidth fee.
My thoughts exactly. This makes the Patriot Act look wimpy and all the libs hated that so badly. Perhaps this is tied into the "crackdown" on any sort of non-supportive view of the current Congress and President that is coming soon aka "Fairness Doctrine"? The ecomony has folks so worried that things like this can sneak in the back door and take things away. Remember Obama's Chief Of Staff has said "never waste a good crisis" which is right out of the Socialist playbook.
Sounds just like what Obama is doing with the Banks, Car companies, utilties, etc.
NASA operates on such a tight budget that any spare parts for things wearing out ahead of predictions due
to excessive use is not in the budget, or will have to be stolen from another program. NASA has every right to
be upset as do the other International partners which have to share the facility and (some) of the bills.
Credit Unions have exposure too. They make mortages, sell securities, etc. Look at the case of Texins Credit Union in Dallas. They took a flyer on mortages and high risk business loans thinking it was always going to go UP. They went from a nice profit to a large loss in less than a year. It's not the scale the big banks are facing but proportionaly it's large. The safest banks are probably the little town or community banks owned by the same folks for many years who are risk averse and careful. They don't make the big profits in the boom but they don't go bust either.
Development environments need to be fast due to turnaround time of fix bugs needing to be minimal.
When you can complile, link, load in the debugger in half the time with a fast machine that
translates into quicker time to market. However you should TEST on what is considered the minimum
supported platform (CPU, Memory, Disk, Video) and if it work within spec there, ship it.
Not to mention all the R&D in the Space program. Bi that was all "new" technology. I don't see a whole lot new in batteries.
How much more can be done in batteries without getting into the exotic and expensive superconducting type of materials. I think it's a boondoogle and a waste of money. If folks want a better battery then the market will provide it WITHOUT Government subsidies.
Not normal for me to reply to an AC..but Hypervisors are NOT a commodity. Commodity basically says it's all interchangeable as they meet some specified standard of performance within a tolerance (for example #1 Wheat). I don't think you are going to be swapping VMWare, Zen and Hyper-V among themselves with no problems.
No, it means Red Hat sees a market that customers would like to run Windows as a VM under Linux. It just means they'll validate each OS works as a VM under the other's Hypervisor, nothing more. No licenses, no patents. I can see running Windows under Linux as a VM (BSOD only takes down the VM and bringing up a new VM takes seconds..not a 3 minute reboot) if you MUST support something that is Windows legacy but have chosen to go Linux with RH Virtualization in the Data Center. Why you would want to run Linux under the MS Hypervisor is the strange question, unless you just wanted a Linux "sandbox" for some reason. I suspect to get the MS stamp of approval for Windows under Linux they required the reciprocal agreement from RH.
You just flat can't say Defense is 50% when other items are at least 2X bigger, the math just doesn't work no matter which data points you use.
To even put Defense in the 35-40% range of REVENUE would mean a 100% budget deficit (i.e. spend 2X of revenue) and I don't think the US is there YET.
The Vogons plan to build an interstellar expressway right where Earth is sitting. Of course they'll have to destroy Earth first, safety you know. That's a huge impact!! Of course if humans had listened to the centuries of broadcast warnings everyone would have known about this. But nooo..humans were listening for Radio Alpha Centuri and trying to Nuke each other. Oh well..so long and thanks for all the fish.
Troll..the defense budget is nowhere near half the Federal spending. The 2008 figures were around 18-20% of Federal spending and about 4.4% of Gross Domestic Product. If you want to find savings look at Mandated Entitlement programs such as Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid and those "pork" projects each Senator sticks in the various spening bills. The funding levels for Defense are projected to DROP in the next few years while entitlement spending zooms to the moon. Add in entitlements contained in the "bailout" and we are going to have significant issues funding just the BASIC military (payroll, facilities, maintenance) we need much less R&D and procurements needed to stay current with technology. Just because the USA doesnt'/won't/can't spend enough of our budget to keep up does not mean our enemies will ease up their spending. Or maybe you want the US to be lesser?????
Quite a bit in several area such as how far they can fly on fuel, how much weight they can carry per ton of fuel, better navigation (GPS), better engines (more thrust, highly reliable, easier to maintain), better airframe design (CAD-CAM and Finite Element Analysis designs for max strength and min weight, better alloys of Aluminum, NC machining). All of these technical improvements that allow for safer, cheaper air travel and air cargo came from the Cold War and some from the Race to the Moon. So, don't say NASA can't do things, more often than not NASA Engineering is crippled by politics and finances not "know how".
I wouldn't call it ignored, not at all. There has never been a formal end to the Korean War, just a negotiated truce and a huge DMZ. We've had to deal with NK saber-rattling since the Korean War, but unlike Iran it has all been nothing but threats for 50 yrs. I'm pretty sure that NK is not sending money to terrorist groups like Hamas and Al-Queda unlike Iran. yes, NK SELLS them arms but they buy then with money from Iran.
NK while it does have a large army, that army is really not a big threat to the stability of that area of the world unlike Iran. If the NKs tried to cross the DMZ they'd be in deep shit, that invasion has been known about and planned for a long time ago. If Iran invades Iraq again it's not going to be easy to stop even if we had troops there, which we soon will not. Plus the NKs will negotiate a little bit and can be prodded by China to be good little communists. No one has any strings to pull with Iran. So there are some huge differences in why Iran gets more attention.
Since when did this happen "can ship back home the local controlled countries' production at very cheap prices"? Oh, you mean the stupid argument about Iraq oil..the oil that is sold on the open market? Last I read Irag has a open bid process for ANY oil company to come in and drill? And I suppose you've never heard of WTO and GATT that (try) to insure fair trade worldwide? The only thing we "import" at cheap prices from some of those other countries in Latin America is labor and most of that is illegal. If you are going to hammer on America (and there are some things to hammer on) then at least learn something about the topic.
At the time this site was built that was considered pretty good security, it passed the checks by the banks and other agencies reporting your credit info into the database the site used. Joe Public isn't going to have a RSA token or such to have a 100% seperate factor! So we used a factor only they would know which was right! Yes it was based solely on user knowledge, as I said there is a balance between usabilty, cost and level of security!
Mulit-factor authentication is NOT expensive (i.e dongles or RSA keyfobs) and doesn't have to be elaborate. I built a credit report site 10 yrs ago that used MFA. We would ask you user name and then based on that we asked the name of a two creditors and an information for each that only you would know and gave your 4 pairs of choices to chose from. For example the amount of your mortgage and the bank plus say your auto loan bank and car make/model, two of those pairs were correct two were false but not obviously so. If you passed that then you had a secret 8 character password (letters, numbers, upper & lower case plus characters) we gave you when you logged in. The ONLY time your SSN was needed was the initial setup of the account.
A one-time pad is just that one-time. And each end of the transaction has to have the same pad and be on the same key sequence. That's not easy to do for 1000's of user and keep in sync, a digital certificate or PKA is easier.
If you wanted the most secure MFA you need to go with biometrics plus physical, such as scanning your fingerprint/retina and then a perhaps a keypad/password with a response profile (people generally enter the keys with the same frequency and timing..if that measurement is out of tolerance incorrect you may have a breach or maybe just a bad keypad day). Then you have an armed guard on the INSIDE who has a roster of names and pictures he can validate you with. No electronic substitute yet for the old Mark I Mod 0 human eyeballs and judgement. Pretty much anything else (excepting 1 time pad) can be spoofed in one way or another.
Whatever MFA you determine needs to be a)easy to user (users are idiots) b) inexpensive c) as secure as possible given a and b. There is such as thing as "too secure" for usefulness.
in the USA H1B's are not normally hired because they have better skills, they are hired because they will work for wages an American would not. To hire an H1B there has to be no American willing (or qualified--yea right) to take the job. Supposedly the pay for the job is "industry standard" but far as I've ever been able to determine such standard does not exist. Therefore someone can offer an H1B say $10/hour when other companies are paying the US Worker $40/hr. No one will take the wages, to they get an H1B at say $15/hr. It does NOT lower the cost of the product to the end consumer, it adds to the bottom line of the corporation. I'm all for profits but within the context of being a good "corporate citizen". You might say, but more profits means more taxes paid and that is good, but the company writes off "fees and expenses" for H1Bs that would stagger your mind thus reducing that profit and redirecting the money to lawyers (who happen many times to the CEO's friends). The whole H1B system is massively shot thru with fraud. I know I used to run a Software group that employed many H1Bs. Conceptually, to fill critical shortages or required skills it is a good idea but the implementation has sucked.
Slashdot Mirror
Scanned images of pages to PDFs rather than say a Word or Excel (or compatible) that one could lift the data (i.e numbers) from and run your own analysis. I don't know about your copy of Adobe Reader but mine doesn't do a good job of taking a data table and putting it into a spreadsheet with rows & columns. Perhaps the full-up Adobe does better.
About right on the cost. Can you imagine the infrastructure to support all this data? Unless of course they reference it in place which brings up all sorts of security questions. Knowing how fast the Government works, the data may be obsolete before posting and who says WHAT data gets posted. All data is not relevant data. And will it be posted in a usable format for "slicing and dicing" or will it be PDFs of the data?
The invasion won't be via mass armed invasion of a whole continent but rather via more subtle economic and political means and winning the battle with as little military combat as possible, but the THREAT of force if they don't cave in. Nukes in a suitcase are terror weapons and terror can be a psychological strategy. To that extent they are still strategic weapons just the deployment ands use is different. Some older tactics have changed but in some cases they still work, reference the mass invasion of Iraq. It's a case by case basis on what works, the concepts are valid just the options to apply the concepts are limited.
the "old tactics of war" are still quite useful and are actually quite old. Go read Sun Tsu or Clausewitz sometime and you'll find the ideas of "insurgency" which you call "modern" is quite ancient. These "old tactics" are still taught in the Military Academies around the world so they must be still pertinent and useful. The tactics (for the most part) have NOT changed at the level that is GI Joe's concern it's just the weapons used in execution of such tactics are much more powerful and deadly and don't always require close contact with the enemy. Even as late as the Iraq War "old tactics" such as masssive bombing raids, uses of infantry and armor for house-to-house combat, snipers, etc. were still used to great effect just as in WWII FYI ,In military terms nukes are a strategic weapon not a tactical weapon. And even so, strategy involving nukes is now close to 60 yrs old (young by military standards) and is NOT going away.
Thinking nations will give up nukes just because Obama says so and promises the USA will is a very foolish notion. The only way to accomplish that is for every nuclear nation to verify in person on site that every weapon is destroyed worldwide. Even the US and Russians had a hard time with this in the SALT talks. Just relying on someone's word or satellite/spy plane photos is not enough.
yep, seems it takes about 60.."Today, more than 60 network and solution providers currently within the Telx Interconnection facility at 2323 Bryan Street".. I've been in the other MUCH LARGER facility on Stemmons Freeway when I worked for Sun. It's a very large facility, 1000's of racks. Used to be a different name which is why I didn't clue in.
All good points, and I guess if they trash the boxes looking for the data they 1) won't find it and 2) they don't pay for the damage. If they didn't take any SAN and any networking gear to rebuild the topology, they'll be back for that stuff you can bet on it. The video I saw was of agents carry 1U and 2U servers out to a white truck, at least they should have had sense to forklift out a whole rack. As I understand it the FBI and CIA both have a strong need for highly talented US CITIZEN computer systems experts. Of course, the pay sucks and you have to work in Washington, DC which double sucks.
Read that message you linked to again. it says 50 BUSINESSES are without service. It could be more or less than 50 systems.
I happen to live in Dallas and the local news showed them removing van loads of servers from the building so it was more than just a few ( no idea how many were actually in the building) so the FBI didn't execute on a tightly targeted warrant. FBI LIE to get what they wanted..NEVER.. ;)
But wouldn't it have been easier to just take the data center down, cut the external connections to the backbones and analyze in place? Find the offending box, yank it out of the rack, trash any backups of that server and let the rest go.
Unless this was a very shady ISP, with some sort of connections to the Wolverine "theft" normally an ISP has no knowledge about content and no control over the content on the servers, they just manage the hardware. Yes I know that you must promise not to do certain thing on their boxen but how would the know what you are hosting? Of course it the traffic to IP A.B.C.D all of a sudden takes a 100X jump you would think they might to check into that or maybe not if it's a nice big over the allocated bandwidth fee.
My thoughts exactly. This makes the Patriot Act look wimpy and all the libs hated that so badly. Perhaps this is tied into
the "crackdown" on any sort of non-supportive view of the current Congress and President that is coming soon aka "Fairness Doctrine"? The ecomony has folks so worried that things like this can sneak in the back door and take things away. Remember
Obama's Chief Of Staff has said "never waste a good crisis" which is right out of the Socialist playbook.
he just promised RMS he would get NASA to name the new Space Station Lab "Stallman" instead of "Colbert".
Sounds just like what Obama is doing with the Banks, Car companies, utilties, etc. NASA operates on such a tight budget that any spare parts for things wearing out ahead of predictions due to excessive use is not in the budget, or will have to be stolen from another program. NASA has every right to be upset as do the other International partners which have to share the facility and (some) of the bills.
Credit Unions have exposure too. They make mortages, sell securities, etc. Look at the case of Texins Credit Union in Dallas. They took a flyer on mortages and high risk business loans thinking it was always going to go UP. They went from a nice profit to a large loss in less than a year. It's not the scale the big banks are facing but proportionaly it's large. The safest banks are probably the little town or community banks owned by the same folks for many years who are risk averse and careful. They don't make the big profits in the boom but they don't go bust either.
Development environments need to be fast due to turnaround time of fix bugs needing to be minimal. When you can complile, link, load in the debugger in half the time with a fast machine that translates into quicker time to market. However you should TEST on what is considered the minimum supported platform (CPU, Memory, Disk, Video) and if it work within spec there, ship it.
Not to mention all the R&D in the Space program. Bi that was all "new" technology. I don't see a whole lot new in batteries. How much more can be done in batteries without getting into the exotic and expensive superconducting type of materials. I think it's a boondoogle and a waste of money. If folks want a better battery then the market will provide it WITHOUT Government subsidies.
Not normal for me to reply to an AC..but Hypervisors are NOT a commodity. Commodity basically says it's all interchangeable as they meet some specified standard of performance within a tolerance (for example #1 Wheat). I don't think you are going to be swapping VMWare, Zen and Hyper-V among themselves with no problems.
No, it means Red Hat sees a market that customers would like to run Windows as a VM under Linux. It just means they'll validate each OS works as a VM under the other's Hypervisor, nothing more. No licenses, no patents. I can see running Windows under Linux as a VM (BSOD only takes down the VM and bringing up a new VM takes seconds..not a 3 minute reboot) if you MUST support something that is Windows legacy but have chosen to go Linux with RH Virtualization in the Data Center. Why you would want to run Linux under the MS Hypervisor is the strange question, unless you just wanted a Linux "sandbox" for some reason. I suspect to get the MS stamp of approval for Windows under Linux they required the reciprocal agreement from RH.
You just flat can't say Defense is 50% when other items are at least 2X bigger, the math just doesn't work no matter which data points you use. To even put Defense in the 35-40% range of REVENUE would mean a 100% budget deficit (i.e. spend 2X of revenue) and I don't think the US is there YET.
The Vogons plan to build an interstellar expressway right where Earth is sitting. Of course they'll have to destroy Earth first, safety you know. That's a huge impact!! Of course if humans had listened to the centuries of broadcast warnings everyone would have known about this. But nooo..humans were listening for Radio Alpha Centuri and trying to Nuke each other. Oh well..so long and thanks for all the fish.
Troll..the defense budget is nowhere near half the Federal spending. The 2008 figures were around 18-20% of Federal spending and about 4.4% of Gross Domestic Product. If you want to find savings look at Mandated Entitlement programs such as Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid and those "pork" projects each Senator sticks in the various spening bills. The funding levels for Defense are projected to DROP in the next few years while entitlement spending zooms to the moon. Add in entitlements contained in the "bailout" and we are going to have significant issues funding just the BASIC military (payroll, facilities, maintenance) we need much less R&D and procurements needed to stay current with technology. Just because the USA doesnt'/won't/can't spend enough of our budget to keep up does not mean our enemies will ease up their spending. Or maybe you want the US to be lesser?????
Quite a bit in several area such as how far they can fly on fuel, how much weight they can carry per ton of fuel, better navigation (GPS), better engines (more thrust, highly reliable, easier to maintain), better airframe design (CAD-CAM and Finite Element Analysis designs for max strength and min weight, better alloys of Aluminum, NC machining). All of these technical improvements that allow for safer, cheaper air travel and air cargo came from the Cold War and some from the Race to the Moon. So, don't say NASA can't do things, more often than not NASA Engineering is crippled by politics and finances not "know how".
I wouldn't call it ignored, not at all. There has never been a formal end to the Korean War, just a negotiated truce and a huge DMZ. We've had to deal with NK saber-rattling since the Korean War, but unlike Iran it has all been nothing but threats for 50 yrs. I'm pretty sure that NK is not sending money to terrorist groups like Hamas and Al-Queda unlike Iran. yes, NK SELLS them arms but they buy then with money from Iran. NK while it does have a large army, that army is really not a big threat to the stability of that area of the world unlike Iran. If the NKs tried to cross the DMZ they'd be in deep shit, that invasion has been known about and planned for a long time ago. If Iran invades Iraq again it's not going to be easy to stop even if we had troops there, which we soon will not. Plus the NKs will negotiate a little bit and can be prodded by China to be good little communists. No one has any strings to pull with Iran. So there are some huge differences in why Iran gets more attention.
Since when did this happen "can ship back home the local controlled countries' production at very cheap prices"? Oh, you mean the stupid argument about Iraq oil..the oil that is sold on the open market? Last I read Irag has a open bid process for ANY oil company to come in and drill? And I suppose you've never heard of WTO and GATT that (try) to insure fair trade worldwide? The only thing we "import" at cheap prices from some of those other countries in Latin America is labor and most of that is illegal. If you are going to hammer on America (and there are some things to hammer on) then at least learn something about the topic.
At the time this site was built that was considered pretty good security, it passed the checks by the banks and other agencies reporting your credit info into the database the site used. Joe Public isn't going to have a RSA token or such to have a 100% seperate factor! So we used a factor only they would know which was right! Yes it was based solely on user knowledge, as I said there is a balance between usabilty, cost and level of security!
Mulit-factor authentication is NOT expensive (i.e dongles or RSA keyfobs) and doesn't have to be elaborate. I built a credit report site 10 yrs ago that used MFA. We would ask you user name and then based on that we asked the name of a two creditors and an information for each that only you would know and gave your 4 pairs of choices to chose from. For example the amount of your mortgage and the bank plus say your auto loan bank and car make/model, two of those pairs were correct two were false but not obviously so. If you passed that then you had a secret 8 character password (letters, numbers, upper & lower case plus characters) we gave you when you logged in. The ONLY time your SSN was needed was the initial setup of the account. A one-time pad is just that one-time. And each end of the transaction has to have the same pad and be on the same key sequence. That's not easy to do for 1000's of user and keep in sync, a digital certificate or PKA is easier. If you wanted the most secure MFA you need to go with biometrics plus physical, such as scanning your fingerprint/retina and then a perhaps a keypad/password with a response profile (people generally enter the keys with the same frequency and timing..if that measurement is out of tolerance incorrect you may have a breach or maybe just a bad keypad day). Then you have an armed guard on the INSIDE who has a roster of names and pictures he can validate you with. No electronic substitute yet for the old Mark I Mod 0 human eyeballs and judgement. Pretty much anything else (excepting 1 time pad) can be spoofed in one way or another. Whatever MFA you determine needs to be a)easy to user (users are idiots) b) inexpensive c) as secure as possible given a and b. There is such as thing as "too secure" for usefulness.
in the USA H1B's are not normally hired because they have better skills, they are hired because they will work for wages an American would not. To hire an H1B there has to be no American willing (or qualified--yea right) to take the job. Supposedly the pay for the job is "industry standard" but far as I've ever been able to determine such standard does not exist. Therefore someone can offer an H1B say $10/hour when other companies are paying the US Worker $40/hr. No one will take the wages, to they get an H1B at say $15/hr. It does NOT lower the cost of the product to the end consumer, it adds to the bottom line of the corporation. I'm all for profits but within the context of being a good "corporate citizen". You might say, but more profits means more taxes paid and that is good, but the company writes off "fees and expenses" for H1Bs that would stagger your mind thus reducing that profit and redirecting the money to lawyers (who happen many times to the CEO's friends). The whole H1B system is massively shot thru with fraud. I know I used to run a Software group that employed many H1Bs. Conceptually, to fill critical shortages or required skills it is a good idea but the implementation has sucked.