Personally I appreciate it when men are a little bit chivalrous and do things like holding the door open for me. I don't mean going way out of their way to get to the door and open it but holding it open and giving me a smile always brightens my day.
I hate when girls take every polite action from men as an oppressive action. They really do spoil it for the rest of us and let's face it, they're being plain rude.
Please, don't let the actions of a few girls stop you from doing what you think is polite/a nice thing to do. There really are some crazy ones out there who convince themselves they're really that important that every guy wants to take advantage of them, then there are the rest of us who take it as a friendly action and will appreciate it for what it is.
Ok, on the whole sneaky, manipulative, underhanded thing: we're all (girls) guilty of this. This is how women interact with each other as well. That doesn't make it right but I'm afraid we can't always see that we're doing it so from my whole gender: sorry. Being a CS student and surrounded by men for the majority of my days I've become a little more understanding of the difficulties I can pose when I'm not being clear but it's kinda hard to stop doing it all together.
Unfortunately if a breech of network security is noticed, it becomes a great big headache for those who have to sort it out. Nobody knows if the attacker was being malicious or just having a little look and so every break in has to be treated as if the attacker meant to do harm. This means making sure nothing was tampered with, nothing nasty was left behind and that it can't happen again. This process takes both time and money to sort out, meaning that even the most 'innocent' of attacks can cost the network owners far more than the silly git who was taking a look probably thought it would.
There really aren't any harmless attackers. Those with a genuine curiosity will find other, legal means of figuring out what they can do.
Yes, this was one thing I was told to do before picking a University (UK). I did a quick google on various teachers in the CS dept of my top University choices. One of them stood out as all of the teachers were on the first results page and after all the other considerations I went to that University and have never regretted my choice.
Obviously there are a ton of things to look at when choosing a University or other higher education Institution but this is one of the things that should be done. It's a shame that so few people do.
Also, I am free to not visit the BBC's website or just plain old block scripts and such things that they may use to help them track me. I can also use a proxy if I'm that worried and can't live without my daily BBC fix. However, if I'm understanding Phorms tracking correctly it's done on the ISP side and I have no say in the matter.
It's unfortunate but as I understand it most universities around the world are tough when it comes to software piracy. At my university we were told that we should not under any circumstance use pirated software on the university network (including personal laptops) or even at home. The reason was that the university has so many deals with software vendors for discounted site-wide licenses that a case against a student or staff for software piracy could end up with a whole lot of software licenses being revoked or not updated. It's easy to see why they took your case so seriously when there is a potential for thousands of dollars worth of software licenses at stake.
No-one? *I* want the iPlayer to be ported. I don't expect the BBC to put out their programs for free in an open format. I'd love it if they did but I have no expectations that they will. Since I'm all paid up on my license fee I want to be able to access the BBC services that I've paid up for, regardless of what operating system I'm using.
People are pissed off because in the UK you have to pay the BBC tax^H^H^Hlicense fee if you own equipment capable of receiving TV broadcast (technically if you don't watch broadcast TV but own a TV you don't need to pay but they'll probably drag you through the courts regardless). the BBC have always worked of the bases that the public owns them since it's funded by public money and hence it's not just their product. If it was a channel that just relied on subscription charges then yes, I'd agree with you but you have to pay up even if you don't watch any of the BBC channels or..well..any of its content. If I'm having to pay for this iPlayer to be developed and run than I want to be able to use it. My terms are reasonable enough (I use Linux which these days isn't really a fringe OS) so they should be providing me with the content I pay for, not just the license payers who happen to use Windows.
I like your analogies much better than most of the others here but I'm inclined to ask one question: how do we know if they've got a bandwidth cap and if they don't where do we stand in regards to access?
It'd kind of like it being normal for *some* people to have unlimited free minutes and unlimited access to free pay-per-view (Ok, free pay-per-view makes no sense but you know what I'm getting at) and this invited person not knowing and just hedging their bets that you do while they use up your resources.
I really don't like the way people assume they can have access on unsecured networks but I equally don't like people not securing their networks in any way whatsoever and then complaining about someone taking liberties.
While I don't really agree with nicking other peoples bandwidth I feel I should point out that if you're metered and worried about over-bandwidth charges shouldn't you be taking extra care when setting up your wireless connection? At least to the point where little sally next doors laptop doesn't accidentally hop onto your network instead of her households and use up your bandwidth instead.
I think the makers of wireless APs should start requiring, at the very least, the default password to be changed and for WEP to be turned on.
...EPrints but more geared towards the video aspect. It's great to see more and more ways for Scientists to get their research out there and in the public sphere!
However, a woman needs it down *all* of the time whilst men need it down *some* of the time. The logical position would be down since that's where it needs to be most of the time.
Actually many women like a bit of experience. Inexperienced guys don't know what they're doing or how to find out what the current girl likes. No, girls don't want someone who's likely to give them an STD but they also don't want an idiot fumbling around clumsily, which is basically what you're saying you'll be with the whole "I'm a virgin" routine.
IMHO the difference between computer science and software engineering is what they do with the knowledge. Software engineers need to be very much aware of the entire computer science spectrum but instead of doing the science (see research) and finding/creating new theories and technologies, they build systems with the existing knowledge. A good software engineer will know as much about computer science as the computer scientist but will use it in a different manner. A programmer is not a software engineer, programming is a prerequisite to be a software engineer.
That said a Mathematician is not a computer scientist and vice versa. Is maths required for computer science? Absolutely! But only up to the level of some calculus, matrix maths, discrete maths and some vector maths. What is not required is a deep understanding of pure mathematics unless you're specialising in a maths heavy area of computer science such as 3D graphics, image recognition, algorithmics and the like. I agree with the author that CS should start moving further away from the maths discipline but do think that the appropriate maths should be kept in the subject.
In a corporate environment one enterprise distro will be used and the same software loaded onto each desktop. That means no problems with directory structures, libs, DE's or really much else. Everyone in the company will be using the same thing, much like they are with windows (can you really see the IT dept letting users choose between windows versions?).
The company doesn't care about whether there's a "linux" or not. They're using RHEL/SuSE/whatever not this mysterious "Linux". I think you'll find a whole lot of "Linux people" disagreeing with you there. Every single Linux admin I've ever met has used lots of different distros and knows the quirks of each one. The company will hire people who can do the job on the system used, not those who don't.
A *good* Linux admin will know whether they can use the system or not and apply for jobs accordingly. A bad admin might try and wing it but hey, they're a bad admin and should never had been hired in the first place.
At the enterprise level there are very few options. I can currently think of 2 off the top of my head: RHEL and SuSE. These are what companies will be using and these are what they will be advertising jobs for, so no, at the enterprise level multiple versions really aren't such a problem. But what if more enterprise distros appear? I still don't see a problem. The IT market has a habit of having it's top 2 or 3 choices and a multitude of alternatives. IT managers will be using the top 2 or 3 and pretty much ignoring everything else unless they get good enough to topple one of the current leaders, in which case there's still only 2 or 3.
It's only really when you get down to individuals and their home desktops that it becomes more difficult...
Well that brings up the problem of new people trying to not be an asshat and gain a good reputation. If no forum will allow people without a good reputation to join how do you get one?
I'm a woman and I don't find this. Yes, on occasion some inconsiderate cretin makes a mess and neglects to clean it up but 99% of the time it's a little dribble which I can quite happily wipe up and get on with my own business. I've been into both mens and womens toilet stalls (I used to clean them) and I find mens to be by far the nastiest.
Web Applications can't really take off until the Internet has almost full penetration and it's pretty obvious that it's not going to happen any time soon. It'll also need a much higher level of reliability which again shows no sign of happening soon.
I'm not convinced about point 1 there. In some cities around the UK you can now get an on-the0spot fine for littering (£50). Apparently no judge is needed.
Are they actually breaking the law or can the police now administer fines?
Actually they did. The price on the price tag is what the object is being advertised as. The price at the checkout is the final specified price. I've had nice surprises a few times when the cashier has told me "Oh look, you get 10% off on this item" after ringing it up, it just wasn't advertised properly.
Security != privacy. Security exists in an attempt to protect things, privacy being one of those things. IMHO privacy is a reality. If someone's infringing upon it they're infringing upon it. What people perceive as actually being private is what I think varies.
if, for example, my local ilec wants to give me extra bandwidth to support their own voip service, then that's fine, as long as their voip service doesn't interfere with the bandwidth i'm purchasing and using to access third party voip services. Which is exactly what the net neutrality legislation is about, making sure they don't do things like that.
Net neutrality isn't about what services the telcos can offer or how much bandwidth they sell in whatever deals they have, that's their business. It's to stop them from charging you as they do now AND charging content providers for that same bandwidth you've already paid up for (the alternative is the content providers service is crippled due to it being restricted in some manner). In other words they would very much like the bandwidth they're selling to be paid for twice over. Think of you AND your friend both getting charged for a phone call instead of just the one who actually made the call.
I should imagine it's to do with picking valid data out of random "junk" being harder than picking valid data out of a bunch of zeros. In a perfect world where a single (or even multiple) pass would guarantee every bit on the disk is zeroed (is that even a word?) and unrecoverable I'd agree that there isn't much difference. Unfortunatly the world is far from perfect and valid data will most likely remain on the disk to be found.
I get the feeling that the Moon base will be very costly, full of massive delays and be a lot like the space station in that people will get very bored with it very quickly. I'd be more interested in a manned mission to Mars. The Mars rover got a lot of attention, a live feed of astronauts on Mars would most likely get a whole lot of attention and may help the current generation get a bit more excited.
IMHO I'd be thinking more about making a Mars base than a Moon base, it's got more potential for expansion than a Moon base.
Slashdot Mirror
Personally I appreciate it when men are a little bit chivalrous and do things like holding the door open for me. I don't mean going way out of their way to get to the door and open it but holding it open and giving me a smile always brightens my day.
I hate when girls take every polite action from men as an oppressive action. They really do spoil it for the rest of us and let's face it, they're being plain rude.
Please, don't let the actions of a few girls stop you from doing what you think is polite/a nice thing to do. There really are some crazy ones out there who convince themselves they're really that important that every guy wants to take advantage of them, then there are the rest of us who take it as a friendly action and will appreciate it for what it is.
Ok, on the whole sneaky, manipulative, underhanded thing: we're all (girls) guilty of this. This is how women interact with each other as well. That doesn't make it right but I'm afraid we can't always see that we're doing it so from my whole gender: sorry. Being a CS student and surrounded by men for the majority of my days I've become a little more understanding of the difficulties I can pose when I'm not being clear but it's kinda hard to stop doing it all together.
Unfortunately if a breech of network security is noticed, it becomes a great big headache for those who have to sort it out. Nobody knows if the attacker was being malicious or just having a little look and so every break in has to be treated as if the attacker meant to do harm. This means making sure nothing was tampered with, nothing nasty was left behind and that it can't happen again. This process takes both time and money to sort out, meaning that even the most 'innocent' of attacks can cost the network owners far more than the silly git who was taking a look probably thought it would.
There really aren't any harmless attackers. Those with a genuine curiosity will find other, legal means of figuring out what they can do.
Yes, this was one thing I was told to do before picking a University (UK). I did a quick google on various teachers in the CS dept of my top University choices. One of them stood out as all of the teachers were on the first results page and after all the other considerations I went to that University and have never regretted my choice.
Obviously there are a ton of things to look at when choosing a University or other higher education Institution but this is one of the things that should be done. It's a shame that so few people do.
Also, I am free to not visit the BBC's website or just plain old block scripts and such things that they may use to help them track me. I can also use a proxy if I'm that worried and can't live without my daily BBC fix. However, if I'm understanding Phorms tracking correctly it's done on the ISP side and I have no say in the matter.
It's unfortunate but as I understand it most universities around the world are tough when it comes to software piracy. At my university we were told that we should not under any circumstance use pirated software on the university network (including personal laptops) or even at home. The reason was that the university has so many deals with software vendors for discounted site-wide licenses that a case against a student or staff for software piracy could end up with a whole lot of software licenses being revoked or not updated. It's easy to see why they took your case so seriously when there is a potential for thousands of dollars worth of software licenses at stake.
IE6 managed to get 11/100 for me (running on xp +sp2)
No-one? *I* want the iPlayer to be ported. I don't expect the BBC to put out their programs for free in an open format. I'd love it if they did but I have no expectations that they will. Since I'm all paid up on my license fee I want to be able to access the BBC services that I've paid up for, regardless of what operating system I'm using.
People are pissed off because in the UK you have to pay the BBC tax^H^H^Hlicense fee if you own equipment capable of receiving TV broadcast (technically if you don't watch broadcast TV but own a TV you don't need to pay but they'll probably drag you through the courts regardless). the BBC have always worked of the bases that the public owns them since it's funded by public money and hence it's not just their product. If it was a channel that just relied on subscription charges then yes, I'd agree with you but you have to pay up even if you don't watch any of the BBC channels or..well..any of its content.
If I'm having to pay for this iPlayer to be developed and run than I want to be able to use it. My terms are reasonable enough (I use Linux which these days isn't really a fringe OS) so they should be providing me with the content I pay for, not just the license payers who happen to use Windows.
I like your analogies much better than most of the others here but I'm inclined to ask one question: how do we know if they've got a bandwidth cap and if they don't where do we stand in regards to access?
It'd kind of like it being normal for *some* people to have unlimited free minutes and unlimited access to free pay-per-view (Ok, free pay-per-view makes no sense but you know what I'm getting at) and this invited person not knowing and just hedging their bets that you do while they use up your resources.
I really don't like the way people assume they can have access on unsecured networks but I equally don't like people not securing their networks in any way whatsoever and then complaining about someone taking liberties.
While I don't really agree with nicking other peoples bandwidth I feel I should point out that if you're metered and worried about over-bandwidth charges shouldn't you be taking extra care when setting up your wireless connection? At least to the point where little sally next doors laptop doesn't accidentally hop onto your network instead of her households and use up your bandwidth instead.
I think the makers of wireless APs should start requiring, at the very least, the default password to be changed and for WEP to be turned on.
...EPrints but more geared towards the video aspect. It's great to see more and more ways for Scientists to get their research out there and in the public sphere!
However, a woman needs it down *all* of the time whilst men need it down *some* of the time. The logical position would be down since that's where it needs to be most of the time.
Actually many women like a bit of experience. Inexperienced guys don't know what they're doing or how to find out what the current girl likes. No, girls don't want someone who's likely to give them an STD but they also don't want an idiot fumbling around clumsily, which is basically what you're saying you'll be with the whole "I'm a virgin" routine.
Yet the statistics you quote are for inconsistent and incompetent condom use. If you learn to use them properly the failure rate drops quite a bit. And if you get a responsible partner she can help take the risk down even further by using the pill or some other form of female contraceptive. This doesn't mean 0% risk but that odds of a problem occurring can be really quite small.
IMHO the difference between computer science and software engineering is what they do with the knowledge. Software engineers need to be very much aware of the entire computer science spectrum but instead of doing the science (see research) and finding/creating new theories and technologies, they build systems with the existing knowledge. A good software engineer will know as much about computer science as the computer scientist but will use it in a different manner. A programmer is not a software engineer, programming is a prerequisite to be a software engineer.
That said a Mathematician is not a computer scientist and vice versa. Is maths required for computer science? Absolutely! But only up to the level of some calculus, matrix maths, discrete maths and some vector maths. What is not required is a deep understanding of pure mathematics unless you're specialising in a maths heavy area of computer science such as 3D graphics, image recognition, algorithmics and the like. I agree with the author that CS should start moving further away from the maths discipline but do think that the appropriate maths should be kept in the subject.
In a corporate environment one enterprise distro will be used and the same software loaded onto each desktop. That means no problems with directory structures, libs, DE's or really much else. Everyone in the company will be using the same thing, much like they are with windows (can you really see the IT dept letting users choose between windows versions?).
The company doesn't care about whether there's a "linux" or not. They're using RHEL/SuSE/whatever not this mysterious "Linux". I think you'll find a whole lot of "Linux people" disagreeing with you there. Every single Linux admin I've ever met has used lots of different distros and knows the quirks of each one. The company will hire people who can do the job on the system used, not those who don't.
A *good* Linux admin will know whether they can use the system or not and apply for jobs accordingly. A bad admin might try and wing it but hey, they're a bad admin and should never had been hired in the first place.
At the enterprise level there are very few options. I can currently think of 2 off the top of my head: RHEL and SuSE. These are what companies will be using and these are what they will be advertising jobs for, so no, at the enterprise level multiple versions really aren't such a problem.
But what if more enterprise distros appear? I still don't see a problem. The IT market has a habit of having it's top 2 or 3 choices and a multitude of alternatives. IT managers will be using the top 2 or 3 and pretty much ignoring everything else unless they get good enough to topple one of the current leaders, in which case there's still only 2 or 3.
It's only really when you get down to individuals and their home desktops that it becomes more difficult...
Well that brings up the problem of new people trying to not be an asshat and gain a good reputation. If no forum will allow people without a good reputation to join how do you get one?
I'm a woman and I don't find this. Yes, on occasion some inconsiderate cretin makes a mess and neglects to clean it up but 99% of the time it's a little dribble which I can quite happily wipe up and get on with my own business. I've been into both mens and womens toilet stalls (I used to clean them) and I find mens to be by far the nastiest.
Web Applications can't really take off until the Internet has almost full penetration and it's pretty obvious that it's not going to happen any time soon. It'll also need a much higher level of reliability which again shows no sign of happening soon.
I'm not convinced about point 1 there. In some cities around the UK you can now get an on-the0spot fine for littering (£50). Apparently no judge is needed.
Are they actually breaking the law or can the police now administer fines?
Actually they did. The price on the price tag is what the object is being advertised as. The price at the checkout is the final specified price. I've had nice surprises a few times when the cashier has told me "Oh look, you get 10% off on this item" after ringing it up, it just wasn't advertised properly.
Security != privacy.
Security exists in an attempt to protect things, privacy being one of those things.
IMHO privacy is a reality. If someone's infringing upon it they're infringing upon it. What people perceive as actually being private is what I think varies.
if, for example, my local ilec wants to give me extra bandwidth to support their own voip service, then that's fine, as long as their voip service doesn't interfere with the bandwidth i'm purchasing and using to access third party voip services.
Which is exactly what the net neutrality legislation is about, making sure they don't do things like that.
Net neutrality isn't about what services the telcos can offer or how much bandwidth they sell in whatever deals they have, that's their business. It's to stop them from charging you as they do now AND charging content providers for that same bandwidth you've already paid up for (the alternative is the content providers service is crippled due to it being restricted in some manner). In other words they would very much like the bandwidth they're selling to be paid for twice over. Think of you AND your friend both getting charged for a phone call instead of just the one who actually made the call.
I should imagine it's to do with picking valid data out of random "junk" being harder than picking valid data out of a bunch of zeros. In a perfect world where a single (or even multiple) pass would guarantee every bit on the disk is zeroed (is that even a word?) and unrecoverable I'd agree that there isn't much difference. Unfortunatly the world is far from perfect and valid data will most likely remain on the disk to be found.
I get the feeling that the Moon base will be very costly, full of massive delays and be a lot like the space station in that people will get very bored with it very quickly. I'd be more interested in a manned mission to Mars. The Mars rover got a lot of attention, a live feed of astronauts on Mars would most likely get a whole lot of attention and may help the current generation get a bit more excited.
IMHO I'd be thinking more about making a Mars base than a Moon base, it's got more potential for expansion than a Moon base.