Re:Searching Questions
on
Defining Google
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
That sounds like an excellent strategy for getting stomped on.
If you don't understand the question, don't waste time pretending you do. You just look like a person who's not smart enough to ask for clarification when you do that.
Re:Google and Others
on
Defining Google
·
· Score: 2, Informative
One of the things missing from the interview, for example, was any sort of discussion of the Google side of things, or what the job or work relationships or technology are like.
Did you ask? When I interviewed there, they drove me nuts, everybody asking all the time whether I had any questions.
And don't forget, google is notoriously secretive. It should come as no surprise that they don't volunteer much information about the technology. A number of my questions got "sorry, I can't answer that" answers.
I just went through the apartment shopping thing in the silicon valley area. I can say that $1500/month is not a completely unbelievable number. A 1-bedroom in Mountain View will cost you around $900/month if you really squeeze it and settle for something not-so-nice. More likely, you'll end up somewhere in the $1000-$1300 range, depending on how many extras you want with the place. That's Mountain View. Some places tend to be significantly more expensive (San Francisco, Atherton, Palo Alto) and some places tend to be significantly less expensive (San Jose, East Palo Alto, Sunnyvale.)
Re:I'll tell you what they're doing!
on
Defining Google
·
· Score: 1
It's not NEARLY as easy to let people go as it is to hire them
California is an at-will employment state. So they can walk you to the door pretty much whenever.
OBPedant: You're correct in saying that this is the wrong way to go about it, but incorrect in suggesting that the com/net nameservers only hand out NS records. If an NS record points to a name that is inside the zone you're looking up, the com/net nameserver *also* has to hand out a glue (A) record for that name. It generally only happens in the case of a misconfiguration, but people have in the past put web and mail server A records into the com/net zones. Such a record will trump whatever's in the authoritative nameserver's zone file.
you are correct. if your registrar only sends in changes once a day, then your changes won't make it into the dns very quickly. most registrars who operate in such a batch mode timed it so that they'd hit the update window, so you probably won't really see your changes any faster than they already are. This move may encourage registrars of all stripes to move to more of a dynamic model of updating, however.
this is a change to the com and net nameservers. It has nothing to do with the domain name registration process, other than that such registrations (or changes to existing domains) will make it into the com and net nameservers faster. Assuming that your registrar doesn't dawdle, that is...
it doesn't really matter anyway, since zone serial numbers are allowed to wrap. secondaries understand how to handle this event as well, so there's no need for admins to step in and do anything in such cases, either.
no, it does not. it just means that if a resolver receives a "no such name" response from one of the com or net nameservers, that "no such name" response will only be cached for 15 minutes instead of a day.
It's not a neutral wire, it's a ground wire. Servicepeople use it when they're working on a line. (It's generally a good idea to tie the power line to ground just in case someone energizes it before you're don't working on it.) It also serves as lightning protection. The ground wire is strung higher up than the power lines, so that's what the lightning will hit (and destroy) first.
I'm talking about a completely decentralized network with no central body allocating addresses,
If you do not have a central authority of some kind that mandates who has control over which common resources, then the whole net would fall apart in a hurry, wouldn't it? For example, if both you and I claimed control of IP range 80/8, then we would probably have trouble correctly routing to each other (as well as to large chunks of Europe.)
Seti connects over port 80 (HTTP), and you can configure it to use a proxy. So if you allow your employees any web access, you also allow access to seti. They could probably add a rule to the proxy to block it, but if they did that every time they wanted to block something, they'd basically be implementing censorware, which we know to not work.
But this might just be me holding NT admins to a level of excellence only uni* admins ever seem to strive for.
The NT admins that I've met seem to have problems with giving a shit about thier machines (eg, "printing is down again. Oh well, that's that way it goes.") In contrast, the unix admins I know seem to care about ALL the machines, even the machines that hardly see usage.
Why would you want to form an opinion on a subject if all you had was unverified information? After a person has been found (innocent|guilty|whatever) is the appropriate time (if ever) to release details to the general public...because those findings have thier root in fact. (presuming absence of evidence tampering, etc)
Unless second guessing the courts is a hobby of yours, in which case the above might not apply to you. But then, of course, you're getting into that whole vigilante thing.
Well, if you were a university or whatever that was half unix and half nt, then it wouldn't be a total overhaul. Not painless, of course, but if you were getting rid of your unix admins, then you could probably afford to hire more nt admins. Or, more realistically, you could stop spending money on improving your unix machines and put most of your budget into the nt side. That would also afford you time to migrate to nt, since the whole process wouldn't be complete for a whole replacement cycle, which around these parts is 3-4 years. A painfully slow process, somewhat reminiscent of (insert unfavorable ms comment here).
Whether the postal service is doing well or not doesn't matter. The USPS offers a great deal, yeah, but the real issue here is that there is a lot of money that could be had by instantiating a tax on email. The post office doesn't figure into this at all, unless they maybe have the same administrative entity handling both of them.
Unfortunately, it makes a lot of sense for the gov't to at least try to tax email. It seems likely that it would be a sort-of-voluntary thing, like income taxes. You know, where they don't check every last person in the country, so you can get away with not paying up, but if they ever do catch you...
Slashdot Mirror
s/6/3/
s/five days/sixteen weeks/
hth, hand.
they said they went to yellow because there were a number of windows worms reported, plus the backup exec exploit.
http://isc.sans.org/diary.php?date=2005-08-12
If you don't understand the question, don't waste time pretending you do. You just look like a person who's not smart enough to ask for clarification when you do that.
Did you ask? When I interviewed there, they drove me nuts, everybody asking all the time whether I had any questions.
And don't forget, google is notoriously secretive. It should come as no surprise that they don't volunteer much information about the technology. A number of my questions got "sorry, I can't answer that" answers.
I just went through the apartment shopping thing in the silicon valley area. I can say that $1500/month is not a completely unbelievable number. A 1-bedroom in Mountain View will cost you around $900/month if you really squeeze it and settle for something not-so-nice. More likely, you'll end up somewhere in the $1000-$1300 range, depending on how many extras you want with the place. That's Mountain View. Some places tend to be significantly more expensive (San Francisco, Atherton, Palo Alto) and some places tend to be significantly less expensive (San Jose, East Palo Alto, Sunnyvale.)
California is an at-will employment state. So they can walk you to the door pretty much whenever.
OBPedant: You're correct in saying that this is the wrong way to go about it, but incorrect in suggesting that the com/net nameservers only hand out NS records. If an NS record points to a name that is inside the zone you're looking up, the com/net nameserver *also* has to hand out a glue (A) record for that name. It generally only happens in the case of a misconfiguration, but people have in the past put web and mail server A records into the com/net zones. Such a record will trump whatever's in the authoritative nameserver's zone file.
you are correct. if your registrar only sends in changes once a day, then your changes won't make it into the dns very quickly. most registrars who operate in such a batch mode timed it so that they'd hit the update window, so you probably won't really see your changes any faster than they already are. This move may encourage registrars of all stripes to move to more of a dynamic model of updating, however.
this is a change to the com and net nameservers. It has nothing to do with the domain name registration process, other than that such registrations (or changes to existing domains) will make it into the com and net nameservers faster. Assuming that your registrar doesn't dawdle, that is...
that would make the digit string too long.
it doesn't really matter anyway, since zone serial numbers are allowed to wrap. secondaries understand how to handle this event as well, so there's no need for admins to step in and do anything in such cases, either.
no, it does not. it just means that if a resolver receives a "no such name" response from one of the com or net nameservers, that "no such name" response will only be cached for 15 minutes instead of a day.
It's not a neutral wire, it's a ground wire. Servicepeople use it when they're working on a line. (It's generally a good idea to tie the power line to ground just in case someone energizes it before you're don't working on it.) It also serves as lightning protection. The ground wire is strung higher up than the power lines, so that's what the lightning will hit (and destroy) first.
I'm talking about a completely decentralized network with no central body allocating addresses,
If you do not have a central authority of some kind that mandates who has control over which common resources, then the whole net would fall apart in a hurry, wouldn't it? For example, if both you and I claimed control of IP range 80/8, then we would probably have trouble correctly routing to each other (as well as to large chunks of Europe.)
Because they have the money and they make the rules?
Seti connects over port 80 (HTTP), and you can configure it to use a proxy. So if you allow your employees any web access, you also allow access to seti. They could probably add a rule to the proxy to block it, but if they did that every time they wanted to block something, they'd basically be implementing censorware, which we know to not work.
If you are not able to handle being a parent, then why did you have kids?
The NT admins that I've met seem to have problems with giving a shit about thier machines (eg, "printing is down again. Oh well, that's that way it goes.") In contrast, the unix admins I know seem to care about ALL the machines, even the machines that hardly see usage.
How widespread is this?
Why would you want to form an opinion on a subject if all you had was unverified information? After a person has been found (innocent|guilty|whatever) is the appropriate time (if ever) to release details to the general public...because those findings have thier root in fact. (presuming absence of evidence tampering, etc)
Unless second guessing the courts is a hobby of yours, in which case the above might not apply to you. But then, of course, you're getting into that whole vigilante thing.
There is a big difference between "not being complete" and "lying."
Crime occurs, details not released
=> not being complete
Person beaten to death, death attributed to natural causes
=> lying
And I don't believe that the parent article said anything about the US being infallible. Rather the opposite.
Well, if you were a university or whatever that was half unix and half nt, then it wouldn't be a total overhaul. Not painless, of course, but if you were getting rid of your unix admins, then you could probably afford to hire more nt admins. Or, more realistically, you could stop spending money on improving your unix machines and put most of your budget into the nt side. That would also afford you time to migrate to nt, since the whole process wouldn't be complete for a whole replacement cycle, which around these parts is 3-4 years. A painfully slow process, somewhat reminiscent of (insert unfavorable ms comment here).
Whether the postal service is doing well or not doesn't matter. The USPS offers a great deal, yeah, but the real issue here is that there is a lot of money that could be had by instantiating a tax on email. The post office doesn't figure into this at all, unless they maybe have the same administrative entity handling both of them.
Unfortunately, it makes a lot of sense for the gov't to at least try to tax email. It seems likely that it would be a sort-of-voluntary thing, like income taxes. You know, where they don't check every last person in the country, so you can get away with not paying up, but if they ever do catch you...