just have everyone pay for whatever happens to them.
The geniuses that modded you insightful must still be living under their parents roof. (basement probably)
Beyond a simple reflex check, our medical technology is fantastic, but it comes at a very high cost.
1: For my last physical, "Simple" blood workup for a physical, there was the better part of 5 separate tests, of which there are a number of things each test checks for. 2: Let's say you are lucky and do something as simple as separating your shoulder . We're STILL talking ER infrastructure, x-rays, pain killers and multiple visits.
ONE trip to the ER for a bad fall at 30mph off a bike? ~$2000. Nothing special going on but a good wound cleaning.
I don't know jack about the methodology Netcraft uses nor do they make it clear. The "top developers" attributes Google as the big winner, but there's no documentation on those stats either.
This page is pretty strange. http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/today/requested.html The site blink.nu is a microsoft press release machine of some kind and has ~1.6 times the number of queries of the next nearest site. Odd to say the least.
Conjecture aside, what's happening is all kinds of GPL(ish) projects are growing and the stats are being positioned as a loss for Apache. This is very similar to how NPD intellect royally screws Apple in favor of Microsoft by aggregating all PC's with Microsoft's OS against Apple. Disaggregate the numbers by vendor and you find Apple does extremely well in consumer segments.
I admin both win2003 and Debian boxes. What you say may be true, but you don't address the COST of windows-server-2007.
In my particular environment (high-availability, low-cpu count) microsoft license costs are extremely high compared to the same feature set in Linux. If you move into high-availability high-cpu count the costs are astronomical.
I have a sneaking suspicion that either:
A. Microsoft is gaming the system explicitly. (ex. Netcraft adjusts their collection methods) B. Microsoft is gaming the system implicitly. (ex. the Office back end crack pipe.)
The idea that even an idiot parking domains would **pay** for something they previously got free is implausible.
OT Comment I suspect some of the.net fanboys in this post are shills, because I just don't find it *that* much better than a Free stack.
It sounds like this is a very large organization with many layers of buracreacy. Furthermore, it sounds like you are trying to apply a technical solution to a non-technical problem.
In this case the non-technical problem is a migration to.net. It's not a technical problem yet. Someone, somewhere is either evaluating a move or getting ready to push.net down your throat. Right now, its a political problem because nothing has landed on your desk.
By all means collect all of the great ideas on this discussion and then do two things.
1. Freshen up your resume and start looking elsewhere. 2. You need to take these ideas up progressively higher levels of management. Each level, if there's any chance at all for your position, will give you/your boss honest feedback to work/rework your presentation to encircle the.net crackpot. Along the way you will probably run into resistance and some retribution. This is why you are looking for another job. It takes the pressure off.
If you can't/won't look for another position, then start learning mono/.net because you want to be a valuable asset.
Nokia 9300. Rock steady OS/phone. Web/email/sms/crackberry. Plays mp3's, views pictures, all of it. SSH client totally works great. Free too. There's a win32 remote desktop client for it too. It's all there.
If you are a 24-7 sys admin you should have this phone to get you out of the occasional admin jam.
The difference between the phones is pretty obvious: 1: Buttons. The mini-qwerty keyboard is perfect for me. 2: Advertising.
It just so happens I am planning an HD Image product, service or technology and the spec is totally hostile to everyone BUT microsoft. (no surprise there)
1. 1. You may review these Materials only (a) as a reference to assist You in planning and designing Your product, service or technology ("Product") to interface with a Microsoft product, specification, service or technology
Mac/Linux/BSD? Nope. So, that appears to rule out web-based stuff. Fortunately, I'm only working on Windows, so I'll read on....You may not (i) duplicate any part of these Materials Okay I won't. But how does my engineering group work with the spec if I can't duplicate it?
any Feedback you voluntarily provide may be used in Microsoft Products Okay, I won't provide any feedback. It was once believed that developers were Microsoft's focus. Apparently not anymore.
Without going into specifics because the EULA prevents it, there are proprietary elements hidden inside this spec.
It's clear they are *very* late to the pro-photo fight that is on now between Apple and Adobe. Each of those companies has a proprietary "pro photo" format.
Sadly most pro photographers won't think about the consequences of adopting proprietary formats until it is too late. For example, some legacy proprietary raw images as provided by the camera manufacturers are not backward compatible. I've read it in the mailing lists already.
http://iqbio.blogspot.com/ [blogspot.com] had a blurb on what you claim. Both applications (a door lock and a sensor on a laptop) are crappy.
Spending several thousands of dollars for a door lock and several hundred for a proper access control peripheral would defy mythbuster tests. It also would make bad tv, so you'll never hear about it.
http://iqbio.blogspot.com/ had a blurb on what you claim. Both applications (a door lock and a sensor on a laptop) are crappy.
Spending several thousands of dollars for a door lock and several hundred for a proper access control peripheral would defy mythbuster tests. It also would make bad tv, so you'll never hear about it.
The word "should" is used to forcefully assert some opinion. There are a million things wrong with the quoted marketingspeak and using "should" to pile on another bad idea is simply wrong.
Remembering dozens of personal identification numbers and passwords is not the solution to identity theft. Biometrics is not a silver bullet for "identity theft." In fact, it's the wrong tool.
The solution is to be able to tie your private information to your person in a way that cannot be compromised PINS are low-cost and quite effective. Post your banking information and PIN. See that. It wasn't compromised.
I'm not saying there aren't problems somewhere in all of that marketingspeak. But there is already a much better global standard called EMV in place that, mysteriously, American banks won't implement.
Apple does hardware, where patents are clearly much more applicable.
Except when a mom-and-pop builds a clever and Patented asic that Apple wants. Most likely Apple gets one of it's off-shore suppliers to copy the ASIC. Goodbye mom-and-pop.
Except when Apple doesn't like some competitors hardware and discovers they have enough money to go a few rounds in court. Then an absurd patent/trademark violation case is started for no reason other than to kill a competitor.
Both situations happen regularly. The patent system has been twisted into a tool to supress competition.
Apple certainly has had fun with patent whores in the past, but they usually come out on top or take care of the issue
And how much does "come out on top" cost? To Apple, not much. But the companies you never hear or care about it is the touch of death. **Every** one of the companies I've worked for have been dragged into court on patent and lame trademark cases, it has directly imperiled the operation of the company for no good reason other than to drive the small guy out of business.
How much does "taking care of the issue" cost Apple? Again, not something they are willing to share with anyone because then the price Apple or any other company for extortion becomes the new lowest dollar amount to settle for.
"Best for them" is certainly not best for the consumer or the hundreds of thousands of small businesses delivering innovative products.
The first is that biometrics suck and are usually almost trivial to subvert. Okay sure, spend $50 on some sensor or $150 on sensor+lock and it will accept a fake finger. But that's not your average biometric installation.
What do you do if somebody hacks your credentials as well? If the bad guy wants in, he won't try to reproduce your *face* to get in. This is just absurd.
The problem is that the unified security mechanism rarely costs more to subvert then all the IDs it replaced. Except biometric installations aren't replacing many access control mechanisms with one. This just isn't happening right now. Later on when stupid people implement biometric authentication, it probably will. They'll probably buy the $50 biometric device too. **Good** biometric systems are expensive and the people paying for them want the best and they normally get it.
The fundamental principle here is that centralising security often reduces security. As stated before, this is not what's happening in biometric installations. Yes, it's quite true with servers. But biometric installations and servers are not comparable.
Finally, biometrics is an excellent solution to some problems. As the technology continues to improve, it will only get better.
My desktop distro-of-choice doesn't allow exec privileges to email attachments. They'd have a problem with my browser if they sent an evil url too.
You bring up a good question with a very practical answer. This software was developed like all software, with time and budget constraints. If it's home-grown or COTS it definitely does the bare minimum so the fear mongering is likely unfounded. That is, until version 2.0. Aaaahhhh!!!
When you get to be a company the size of Acer, the whole notion of starting something new like selling a system with Linux installed just doesn't happen. In normal circumstances, this kind of thing comes down from on-high. Like "UK subsidiary set up a Linux SKU for product xyz."
If the people running the UK office have some sway with Acer HQ, they would say, "Market Research says there's no market so we don't want to sell it." The elusive "market research" could be anyone from the resellers that sell their product now, to paying for sell-through data. In both cases, it's quite typical that the information is totally dependent on what's sold over a long period of time.
The quotes also point out that the entire sales chain wants to do as little work as possible to make their money. Microsoft represents the least possible work. Selling a Linux desktop is still hard work in most cases and from a cost of the entire system package, probably less profitable.
Yeah, Microsoft has Acer by the short-and-curlies. As described above, there's a confluence of other factors that factor in there that help the situation stay the same.
told him to be more transparent, and stop ducking the hard questions. He said that he wanted to do that
There's a million reasons why there will be practically no transparency. While it's easy to point fingers at the current administration and break out the tin foil hat, most blame goes right back to non-voters and voters alike.
It's nice that the TSA head honcho knows how to play Good Cop but that's about all one can expect.
Having an NSA friendly agent running the IETF will make their jobs much easier. I boldly predict next to nothing will be done publicly by this guy. I have a feeling he will be **very** busy not as chair, but as an NSA rep who just happens to chair the IETF. Very subtle but important distinction similar to using RNC email accounts at the whitehouse.
The question is why and how. What has either this law or woman woman done or not done to engender this kind of hostility?
Mod parent interesting. This is the crux of the matter.
I would buy a subscription to _something_ that gave me this bit of news in 500 words or less. Unless of course, it leads to far more interesting things. Then I'd wade through more than 500 words.
Slashdot Mirror
just have everyone pay for whatever happens to them.
The geniuses that modded you insightful must still be living under their parents roof. (basement probably)
Beyond a simple reflex check, our medical technology is fantastic, but it comes at a very high cost.
1: For my last physical, "Simple" blood workup for a physical, there was the better part of 5 separate tests, of which there are a number of things each test checks for.
2: Let's say you are lucky and do something as simple as separating your shoulder . We're STILL talking ER infrastructure, x-rays, pain killers and multiple visits.
ONE trip to the ER for a bad fall at 30mph off a bike? ~$2000. Nothing special going on but a good wound cleaning.
If there was ever a justification for openly spying on *everyone* online, I'd say this is it.
Either that or more "family friendly" legislation to protect us from ourselves. (Which never works)
Or maybe some combination of the two.
I don't know jack about the methodology Netcraft uses nor do they make it clear. The "top developers" attributes Google as the big winner, but there's no documentation on those stats either.
l The site blink.nu is a microsoft press release machine of some kind and has ~1.6 times the number of queries of the next nearest site. Odd to say the least.
This page is pretty strange. http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/today/requested.htm
Conjecture aside, what's happening is all kinds of GPL(ish) projects are growing and the stats are being positioned as a loss for Apache. This is very similar to how NPD intellect royally screws Apple in favor of Microsoft by aggregating all PC's with Microsoft's OS against Apple. Disaggregate the numbers by vendor and you find Apple does extremely well in consumer segments.
I admin both win2003 and Debian boxes. What you say may be true, but you don't address the COST of windows-server-2007.
.net fanboys in this post are shills, because I just don't find it *that* much better than a Free stack.
In my particular environment (high-availability, low-cpu count) microsoft license costs are extremely high compared to the same feature set in Linux. If you move into high-availability high-cpu count the costs are astronomical.
I have a sneaking suspicion that either:
A. Microsoft is gaming the system explicitly. (ex. Netcraft adjusts their collection methods)
B. Microsoft is gaming the system implicitly. (ex. the Office back end crack pipe.)
The idea that even an idiot parking domains would **pay** for something they previously got free is implausible.
OT Comment
I suspect some of the
It sounds like this is a very large organization with many layers of buracreacy. Furthermore, it sounds like you are trying to apply a technical solution to a non-technical problem.
.net. It's not a technical problem yet. Someone, somewhere is either evaluating a move or getting ready to push .net down your throat. Right now, its a political problem because nothing has landed on your desk.
.net crackpot. Along the way you will probably run into resistance and some retribution. This is why you are looking for another job. It takes the pressure off.
In this case the non-technical problem is a migration to
By all means collect all of the great ideas on this discussion and then do two things.
1. Freshen up your resume and start looking elsewhere.
2. You need to take these ideas up progressively higher levels of management. Each level, if there's any chance at all for your position, will give you/your boss honest feedback to work/rework your presentation to encircle the
If you can't/won't look for another position, then start learning mono/.net because you want to be a valuable asset.
Can't recommend the nokia 9300 enough.
Nokia 9300. Rock steady OS/phone. Web/email/sms/crackberry. Plays mp3's, views pictures, all of it. SSH client totally works great. Free too. There's a win32 remote desktop client for it too. It's all there.
1 /qid=1186178543/ref=olp_product_details/102-950111 7-2106551?ie=UTF8&qid=1186178543&sr=8-1&seller=
If you are a 24-7 sys admin you should have this phone to get you out of the occasional admin jam.
The difference between the phones is pretty obvious:
1: Buttons. The mini-qwerty keyboard is perfect for me.
2: Advertising.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000SBGOHO/sr=8-
Completely true. Here's one shining example. http://www.dailybruin.ucla.edu/news/2007/mar/01/ev olution_professor/
It just so happens I am planning an HD Image product, service or technology and the spec is totally hostile to everyone BUT microsoft. (no surprise there)
...You may not (i) duplicate any part of these Materials
1. 1. You may review these Materials only (a) as a reference to assist You in planning and designing Your product, service or technology ("Product") to interface with a Microsoft product, specification, service or technology
Mac/Linux/BSD? Nope. So, that appears to rule out web-based stuff. Fortunately, I'm only working on Windows, so I'll read on.
Okay I won't. But how does my engineering group work with the spec if I can't duplicate it?
any Feedback you voluntarily provide may be used in Microsoft Products
Okay, I won't provide any feedback. It was once believed that developers were Microsoft's focus. Apparently not anymore.
Without going into specifics because the EULA prevents it, there are proprietary elements hidden inside this spec.
It's clear they are *very* late to the pro-photo fight that is on now between Apple and Adobe. Each of those companies has a proprietary "pro photo" format.
Sadly most pro photographers won't think about the consequences of adopting proprietary formats until it is too late. For example, some legacy proprietary raw images as provided by the camera manufacturers are not backward compatible. I've read it in the mailing lists already.
http://iqbio.blogspot.com/ [blogspot.com] had a blurb on what you claim. Both applications (a door lock and a sensor on a laptop) are crappy.
Spending several thousands of dollars for a door lock and several hundred for a proper access control peripheral would defy mythbuster tests. It also would make bad tv, so you'll never hear about it.
Cheap biometrics just don't work. Yet.
http://iqbio.blogspot.com/ had a blurb on what you claim. Both applications (a door lock and a sensor on a laptop) are crappy.
Spending several thousands of dollars for a door lock and several hundred for a proper access control peripheral would defy mythbuster tests. It also would make bad tv, so you'll never hear about it.
Which manufacturer? Where did they buy it? Who provided the application that accepted a photocopy?
the point of the article ... is that they should:
The word "should" is used to forcefully assert some opinion. There are a million things wrong with the quoted marketingspeak and using "should" to pile on another bad idea is simply wrong.
Remembering dozens of personal identification numbers and passwords is not the solution to identity theft.
Biometrics is not a silver bullet for "identity theft." In fact, it's the wrong tool.
The solution is to be able to tie your private information to your person in a way that cannot be compromised
PINS are low-cost and quite effective. Post your banking information and PIN. See that. It wasn't compromised.
I'm not saying there aren't problems somewhere in all of that marketingspeak. But there is already a much better global standard called EMV in place that, mysteriously, American banks won't implement.
Apple does hardware, where patents are clearly much more applicable.
Except when a mom-and-pop builds a clever and Patented asic that Apple wants. Most likely Apple gets one of it's off-shore suppliers to copy the ASIC. Goodbye mom-and-pop.
Except when Apple doesn't like some competitors hardware and discovers they have enough money to go a few rounds in court. Then an absurd patent/trademark violation case is started for no reason other than to kill a competitor.
Both situations happen regularly. The patent system has been twisted into a tool to supress competition.
Apple certainly has had fun with patent whores in the past, but they usually come out on top or take care of the issue
And how much does "come out on top" cost? To Apple, not much. But the companies you never hear or care about it is the touch of death. **Every** one of the companies I've worked for have been dragged into court on patent and lame trademark cases, it has directly imperiled the operation of the company for no good reason other than to drive the small guy out of business.
How much does "taking care of the issue" cost Apple? Again, not something they are willing to share with anyone because then the price Apple or any other company for extortion becomes the new lowest dollar amount to settle for.
"Best for them" is certainly not best for the consumer or the hundreds of thousands of small businesses delivering innovative products.
The first is that biometrics suck and are usually almost trivial to subvert.
Okay sure, spend $50 on some sensor or $150 on sensor+lock and it will accept a fake finger. But that's not your average biometric installation.
What do you do if somebody hacks your credentials as well?
If the bad guy wants in, he won't try to reproduce your *face* to get in. This is just absurd.
The problem is that the unified security mechanism rarely costs more to subvert then all the IDs it replaced.
Except biometric installations aren't replacing many access control mechanisms with one. This just isn't happening right now. Later on when stupid people implement biometric authentication, it probably will. They'll probably buy the $50 biometric device too. **Good** biometric systems are expensive and the people paying for them want the best and they normally get it.
The fundamental principle here is that centralising security often reduces security.
As stated before, this is not what's happening in biometric installations. Yes, it's quite true with servers. But biometric installations and servers are not comparable.
Finally, biometrics is an excellent solution to some problems. As the technology continues to improve, it will only get better.
enough said.
My desktop distro-of-choice doesn't allow exec privileges to email attachments. They'd have a problem with my browser if they sent an evil url too.
You bring up a good question with a very practical answer. This software was developed like all software, with time and budget constraints. If it's home-grown or COTS it definitely does the bare minimum so the fear mongering is likely unfounded. That is, until version 2.0. Aaaahhhh!!!
When you get to be a company the size of Acer, the whole notion of starting something new like selling a system with Linux installed just doesn't happen. In normal circumstances, this kind of thing comes down from on-high. Like "UK subsidiary set up a Linux SKU for product xyz."
If the people running the UK office have some sway with Acer HQ, they would say, "Market Research says there's no market so we don't want to sell it." The elusive "market research" could be anyone from the resellers that sell their product now, to paying for sell-through data. In both cases, it's quite typical that the information is totally dependent on what's sold over a long period of time.
The quotes also point out that the entire sales chain wants to do as little work as possible to make their money. Microsoft represents the least possible work. Selling a Linux desktop is still hard work in most cases and from a cost of the entire system package, probably less profitable.
Yeah, Microsoft has Acer by the short-and-curlies. As described above, there's a confluence of other factors that factor in there that help the situation stay the same.
Every Engineering Department I've worked with would have designed a user-replaceable battery and called it a "common sense" feature. Which it is.
In exchange for whatever coolness that's been bestowed upon you for parting ways with $500+ for the device, you assume the hidden costs of cool.
This brings us to the magic of the Steve Jobs RDF: You and your brethren feel good paying more for less.
told him to be more transparent, and stop ducking the hard questions. He said that he wanted to do that
There's a million reasons why there will be practically no transparency. While it's easy to point fingers at the current administration and break out the tin foil hat, most blame goes right back to non-voters and voters alike.
It's nice that the TSA head honcho knows how to play Good Cop but that's about all one can expect.
Why not have your ipod/linux layer cake and eat it too?
http://www.rockbox.org/
You get all the ipod groupthink on a sound OS.
I'm not say _this_ guy in particular is the trojan horse for the end of an anonymous Internet, but it's one step closer.
n sa/index_np.html
At this point in the game, it's assumed all traffic is being monitored through the Telco's. http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2006/06/21/att_
Having an NSA friendly agent running the IETF will make their jobs much easier. I boldly predict next to nothing will be done publicly by this guy. I have a feeling he will be **very** busy not as chair, but as an NSA rep who just happens to chair the IETF. Very subtle but important distinction similar to using RNC email accounts at the whitehouse.
-Quanta wouldn't put up the **significant** investment required to get a production sample out the door.
:(
-Quanta doesn't control or otherwise have much influence with the component vendors.
-No one is getting rich in a $200 unit.
-Your premise suggests a massive cooperative effort the likes of which has never been seen in history. Unlikely
The question is why and how. What has either this law or woman woman done or not done to engender this kind of hostility?
Mod parent interesting. This is the crux of the matter.
I would buy a subscription to _something_ that gave me this bit of news in 500 words or less. Unless of course, it leads to far more interesting things. Then I'd wade through more than 500 words.