I think this feeds back into the article -- the reason the nerds/gamers are so awful people to every girl playing games is that their social training in how to interact with girls comes from video games and porn. It's a cycle, and you need to break it somewhere. TFA suggests that this should be in the Sex Ed classes in school, where acceptable social interaction techniques should be taught along with "really -- sex can lead to disease and pregnancy if not done in a responsible manner (and sometimes even then)."
Not to mention, Companies. Would you want your internal documents stored on Google Cloud where it could be "read" or even sent to a 3rd party ?
The answer appears to be a resounding "Yes, as long as you don't force me to consider the implications."
I think you'll find that today, the majority of corporate IP from the western world has found its way onto the Google Cloud. When corporations lock things down so tight that it becomes a day's endeavor to send a spreadsheet from one office to another in a large corporation, people tend to give up and use gmail. When you're a small shop and can't afford the resiliency that's a requirement in this day and age, you're willing to risk the perceived small chance of losing your IP for the pure fact that you can afford to do business using Google Cloud.
So would you "want" your documents stored there? Probably not. When it comes to pragmatism however, most companies and/or at least a few employees let pragmatism win out over privacy concerns.
Also, if the employer wants to foster the add-on community, they may be willing to write up a contract with their employee stating that he can make add-ons after hours and retain copyright. I can't see any legal department actually allowing that, but it's possible (especially if the employer is a startup and really values him as a contributing employee). See situations like IBM employing people whose task is to work on Open Source software -- sometimes the copyright goes to IBM, but sometimes it goes to the individual developer, even though IBM is directly paying them to produce the content, and they're a salaried employee. It all depends on the contract (which has to be spelled out very clearly, as does the assignment of copyright, which is a separate document, or it reverts to the default contract).
To play devil's advocate with your first paragraph: it's possible that you treat encryption kind of like the codes to the nuclear warheads: in order to decrypt, it requires a private key held by the FBI, a private key held by Congress, and a private key held by the Senate. The keys are one-time chained keys, so everyone has to use them in tandem, and they can only be used once in each system. That way, you need to offer enough money to three arms of the government at the same time in order to compromise the system (if you miss one, you'll likely end up with the keys you grab being used and worthless before you gain access, at which point you have to start all over again).
On the other side, such a system would be WAY more of a bother than the current "get a warrant" system that only involves two branches of government, so the FBI would never go for it in the first place. And someone would find a way to do an end-run around such a system anyway, just like they do today.
For your second paragraph: yeah. That's the entire reason Google and Apple are DOING the whole encryption thing. It was the only way they could guarantee to their international customers that they weren't colluding with the NSA. Take that away, and away goes their business (as we already know that the NSA/CIA were using their snooping abilities to conduct and/or enable corporate espionage).
Because of the hoopla regarding crypto going on, you're already seeing a mad rush by many companies to go the Sony route, and have North American business firewalled off from the international corporate entity. Ireland is looking like a very profitable place to work right now as a result.
I think you're missing the point of what I was saying: when you use statistical anyalyses to control for variance across studies, you are filtering the outliers where one study does not line up with the common results across studies. If you normalize entire studies against the group and come to the conclusion that they don't agree, that means you either lost significant data during the normalization process (which indicates the studies weren't really measuring the same thing) or you conclude that the studies had no significant data to begin with (they did not result in usable findings). This kind of error in normalisation is often found when normalizing across a poisson distribution when the assumptions about average rate or interval turn out to be innacurate.
When you increase the signal to noise ratio (in study normalisation AND in signals processing), what you're doing is throwing out the outliers that don't match the distribution you're expecting. This is great if you have a known value already (which is why signals processing depends on a carrier signal), but not so great when you've got people adamantly arguing that grey is both black and white. When you're looking for a signal in a large volume of data, you'll invariably find it, even if you perform enough double blind tests (which isn't what's happening here by a long shot).
What's up with generalizing whole age groups nowadays?
I'm well under 30....
As you get older, you realize that generalizing whole age groups always exists. I remember being in situations where I was the "token young person" when I was in my mid-30's. The others were continually surprised when I took my position seriously and contributed something of value.
And this was years ago. Having read a lot of literature, I know that such gripes about age generalization goes back at least as far as the written word.
By the way, not everybody who's over 30 generalizes whole age groups;)
Interestingly, those subsurface ocean waves are really important for the life we already have on earth; they stir up the oceanic layers, bringing surface oxygen to the rest, and nutrients to the surface. Without them, you get things like the Black Sea, where once you go past a certain depth, there's no oxygen in the water, so there's also no life.
I'd like to know what effect the Pacific Landfill has on subsurface waves, and what effect subsurface waves have on the Landfill.
Ah; but defense-in-depth says "Assume you're screwed no matter what you do. Now that you're in the right mind space, which implementation is easiest to mitigate when things go wrong?"
I can tell you right now: the answer isn't roll-your-own, and it's not "optimize the reference implementation" either.
Argh; Iceland might be enjoying that, but I was talking about Greenland. Iceland also gets to enjoy increased tectonic activity, as the result of Greenland rising.
And the reason it should be considered a reasonable assumption is that we know what we're pumping into the atmosphere, we know what's STAYING in the atmosphere, we know what's increasing in levels in the atmosphere, and we're able to track those values against temperatures around the globe.
There's a strong correlation between specific chemicals being pumped into the atmosphere and specific temperature shifts. This doesn't prove causation by any means, but it means it's worth investigating further. Unfortunately, by the time any study with a reasonable degree of certainty is complete, the results might be irreversable. So we proceed with the assumption that the correlation is strong until proven otherwise, as we have the ability to control some of the variables still.
The truth is, HGW isn't really a problem; the problem is "how do we keep nature in stasis, so we can continue to enjoy the climates we currently have around the world?"
I'm sure the people of Iceland are enjoying having more land and warmer temperatures. The people of Haiti? Probably not enjoying the increased storms, hotter temperatures, and rising ocean levels. Were these things caused by human impact on the climate? Probably, but it's only co-related, not proven.
The clue should be when they start talking about "normalizing" the models. Normalizing means throwing out all the data that doesn't line up. If you throw out all the data not shared by the different models, you end up with... one model.
If I conducted studies of the average age of people I worked with, people I lived with, people I did recreational activities with, people present in retirement homes when I visited, people present in maternity wards when I visited... you know what? I'd come to the conclusion, after normalizing all the data, that the average age was MY age. From which I could conclude that the studies do not prove that people get old, or start off young.
You can tell you're getting old when you remember the Elder Days when resumes were in "pages".
"Pages" 1. Old School: actual pieces of paper, hand-written or printed with text. 2. New School: the amount of text/media that will fit in a browser window 3. Apple Addict: the software you use to develop your CV
It's specifically the exporting of the plans that's problematic. It's illegal to ship a gun out of the country without regulatory approval (as well as more menacing items described as "arms" under ITAR, like battleships and space launch vehicles). It's also illegal to export the plans for the gun (or the battleship). The argument is that they uploaded it to the internet, so some non-US person could download a copy. I think in the case of handguns, it's a clear case of censorship (given the second amendment right to own handguns, prohibiting distributing relevant data is an end-run around this). In the case of battleships, it's not obviously unreasonable to prevent persons from designing battleships and selling the plans to non-allied nation states. In the case of launch vehicles (which are practically ICBMs), there's more of a gray area.
Also on the ITAR list are such things as cellphone SIMs and other hardware-based cryptographic tools. Yeah, PGP can be freely exported now, but there's still a large list of "gray area" things that use the same export paperwork as nuclear weapons.
And along with that, there are the export restrictions to countries like Iran, N. Korea, etc... these plans would definitely run afoul of those restrictions if the site isn't actively blocking those countries. However, if the guy sets things up in the same way Phil Zimmerman did back in the day for PGP, there shouldn't be an issue.
Now, how many lives do you think would be lost because they were not able to defend themselves against a home invader, carjacker or mugger on the street still armed with knives, clubs & broken bottles?
It's not as simple of math as you think, no matter how unfortunate.
Not simple indeed -- if violent offenders didn't have guns, the fallback items would be knives, clubs, broken bottles and syringes. All of these are in-close items, which means carjackings would likely go way down, muggings would be against people perceptibly weaker, and broken bottle fights would still end up in ER.
I'd definitely wonder whether things such as slings, shruiken and crossbows would make a comeback, however (on both sides of the equation).
This goes back to the discussion somewhere up the thread... older coders generally admit to not knowing things they don't know, know a *way* to do things, and know what doesn't work.
So when they have a "best practices" way of handling something, and someone comes out with some method outside of that that they haven't used before, they're more than happy to say "Hmm... I've never done it that way before; I'm not sure what you mean..." which often means "Is he really suggesting we do it THAT way? Surely he's aware of the pitfalls; maybe he's got some new angle on it, let's hear him out."
In your case, filtering is the reactive way to do it. The code should be set up such that characters outside the accepted set aren't allowed in the first place, say by using prepared statements. If you're at the point where a string needs to be filtered to protect your DB, you've already done something wrong.
Actually, for canvassing CVs, get rid of all experience not directly related to the job you're applying for. Try to make it all fit on one page. Make sure your CV touches on all the points mentioned in the job ad.
The rest comes out as you say, during the interview with the tech manager. And remember: you're interviewing the tech manager as much as they're interviewing you. If they're not a good fit, don't take the job. You might also want to let HR know why you declined the offer.
Make sure to share the software when you're done:)
Personally, I've been hosting my own private collection for years, thanks to NAS and a VPN.
As an alternative, amazingly, Apple seems to "get it" here with their $25/year Match program too -- anything you sync through their service comes with full service, no ads, and you sync the music and playlists to your devices, so if ITS and Match ever vanish, you've still got everything. Google seems to be catching on as well, but they still want you to put everything on their servers for the most part (but make it really convenient to do so).
The feds I've talked to at conferences generally don't mind, as long as there's no associated publicity that goes outside the conference -- that is, they don't want to be on someone's blog, and especially don't want to show up on a news site. Probably because they're at the conference on the government dime.
You do realize that MacKeeper is a Russian product, right? Amusingly, Kaspersky is the one AV outfit that outright blocks them.
MacKeeper works via the partnerka system -- affiliate downloads. Many of their affiliates are from the Russian underworld, and own other properties such as porn and warez sites.
Considering the fact that some thieves have been caught after they used a stolen phone to post geolocated selfies to the victims' Instagram or Facebook account, I think that for the most part, low-brow thieves are by definition some kind of stupid.
If you have attention to detail, patience and intelligence, you realize that there are easier ways to make money than petty theft.
Slashdot Mirror
I think this feeds back into the article -- the reason the nerds/gamers are so awful people to every girl playing games is that their social training in how to interact with girls comes from video games and porn. It's a cycle, and you need to break it somewhere. TFA suggests that this should be in the Sex Ed classes in school, where acceptable social interaction techniques should be taught along with "really -- sex can lead to disease and pregnancy if not done in a responsible manner (and sometimes even then)."
Not to mention, Companies. Would you want your internal documents stored on Google Cloud where it could be "read" or even sent to a 3rd party ?
The answer appears to be a resounding "Yes, as long as you don't force me to consider the implications."
I think you'll find that today, the majority of corporate IP from the western world has found its way onto the Google Cloud. When corporations lock things down so tight that it becomes a day's endeavor to send a spreadsheet from one office to another in a large corporation, people tend to give up and use gmail. When you're a small shop and can't afford the resiliency that's a requirement in this day and age, you're willing to risk the perceived small chance of losing your IP for the pure fact that you can afford to do business using Google Cloud.
So would you "want" your documents stored there? Probably not. When it comes to pragmatism however, most companies and/or at least a few employees let pragmatism win out over privacy concerns.
This is a good point, and is a possible method.
Also, if the employer wants to foster the add-on community, they may be willing to write up a contract with their employee stating that he can make add-ons after hours and retain copyright. I can't see any legal department actually allowing that, but it's possible (especially if the employer is a startup and really values him as a contributing employee). See situations like IBM employing people whose task is to work on Open Source software -- sometimes the copyright goes to IBM, but sometimes it goes to the individual developer, even though IBM is directly paying them to produce the content, and they're a salaried employee. It all depends on the contract (which has to be spelled out very clearly, as does the assignment of copyright, which is a separate document, or it reverts to the default contract).
To play devil's advocate with your first paragraph: it's possible that you treat encryption kind of like the codes to the nuclear warheads: in order to decrypt, it requires a private key held by the FBI, a private key held by Congress, and a private key held by the Senate. The keys are one-time chained keys, so everyone has to use them in tandem, and they can only be used once in each system. That way, you need to offer enough money to three arms of the government at the same time in order to compromise the system (if you miss one, you'll likely end up with the keys you grab being used and worthless before you gain access, at which point you have to start all over again).
On the other side, such a system would be WAY more of a bother than the current "get a warrant" system that only involves two branches of government, so the FBI would never go for it in the first place. And someone would find a way to do an end-run around such a system anyway, just like they do today.
For your second paragraph: yeah. That's the entire reason Google and Apple are DOING the whole encryption thing. It was the only way they could guarantee to their international customers that they weren't colluding with the NSA. Take that away, and away goes their business (as we already know that the NSA/CIA were using their snooping abilities to conduct and/or enable corporate espionage).
Because of the hoopla regarding crypto going on, you're already seeing a mad rush by many companies to go the Sony route, and have North American business firewalled off from the international corporate entity. Ireland is looking like a very profitable place to work right now as a result.
I think you're missing the point of what I was saying: when you use statistical anyalyses to control for variance across studies, you are filtering the outliers where one study does not line up with the common results across studies. If you normalize entire studies against the group and come to the conclusion that they don't agree, that means you either lost significant data during the normalization process (which indicates the studies weren't really measuring the same thing) or you conclude that the studies had no significant data to begin with (they did not result in usable findings). This kind of error in normalisation is often found when normalizing across a poisson distribution when the assumptions about average rate or interval turn out to be innacurate.
When you increase the signal to noise ratio (in study normalisation AND in signals processing), what you're doing is throwing out the outliers that don't match the distribution you're expecting. This is great if you have a known value already (which is why signals processing depends on a carrier signal), but not so great when you've got people adamantly arguing that grey is both black and white. When you're looking for a signal in a large volume of data, you'll invariably find it, even if you perform enough double blind tests (which isn't what's happening here by a long shot).
What's up with generalizing whole age groups nowadays?
I'm well under 30....
As you get older, you realize that generalizing whole age groups always exists. I remember being in situations where I was the "token young person" when I was in my mid-30's. The others were continually surprised when I took my position seriously and contributed something of value.
And this was years ago. Having read a lot of literature, I know that such gripes about age generalization goes back at least as far as the written word.
By the way, not everybody who's over 30 generalizes whole age groups ;)
hole in the ozone, reduce, re-use, recycle, crack babies....
Interestingly, those subsurface ocean waves are really important for the life we already have on earth; they stir up the oceanic layers, bringing surface oxygen to the rest, and nutrients to the surface. Without them, you get things like the Black Sea, where once you go past a certain depth, there's no oxygen in the water, so there's also no life.
I'd like to know what effect the Pacific Landfill has on subsurface waves, and what effect subsurface waves have on the Landfill.
Ah; but defense-in-depth says "Assume you're screwed no matter what you do. Now that you're in the right mind space, which implementation is easiest to mitigate when things go wrong?"
I can tell you right now: the answer isn't roll-your-own, and it's not "optimize the reference implementation" either.
At some point, some politician is going to successfully spin the climate change scare as being created by terrorists. Whether there's AGW or not.
Argh; Iceland might be enjoying that, but I was talking about Greenland. Iceland also gets to enjoy increased tectonic activity, as the result of Greenland rising.
And the reason it should be considered a reasonable assumption is that we know what we're pumping into the atmosphere, we know what's STAYING in the atmosphere, we know what's increasing in levels in the atmosphere, and we're able to track those values against temperatures around the globe.
There's a strong correlation between specific chemicals being pumped into the atmosphere and specific temperature shifts. This doesn't prove causation by any means, but it means it's worth investigating further. Unfortunately, by the time any study with a reasonable degree of certainty is complete, the results might be irreversable. So we proceed with the assumption that the correlation is strong until proven otherwise, as we have the ability to control some of the variables still.
The truth is, HGW isn't really a problem; the problem is "how do we keep nature in stasis, so we can continue to enjoy the climates we currently have around the world?"
I'm sure the people of Iceland are enjoying having more land and warmer temperatures. The people of Haiti? Probably not enjoying the increased storms, hotter temperatures, and rising ocean levels. Were these things caused by human impact on the climate? Probably, but it's only co-related, not proven.
The clue should be when they start talking about "normalizing" the models. Normalizing means throwing out all the data that doesn't line up. If you throw out all the data not shared by the different models, you end up with... one model.
If I conducted studies of the average age of people I worked with, people I lived with, people I did recreational activities with, people present in retirement homes when I visited, people present in maternity wards when I visited... you know what? I'd come to the conclusion, after normalizing all the data, that the average age was MY age. From which I could conclude that the studies do not prove that people get old, or start off young.
Yeah; it's really bad science.
You can tell you're getting old when you remember the Elder Days when resumes were in "pages".
"Pages"
1. Old School: actual pieces of paper, hand-written or printed with text.
2. New School: the amount of text/media that will fit in a browser window
3. Apple Addict: the software you use to develop your CV
It's specifically the exporting of the plans that's problematic. It's illegal to ship a gun out of the country without regulatory approval (as well as more menacing items described as "arms" under ITAR, like battleships and space launch vehicles). It's also illegal to export the plans for the gun (or the battleship). The argument is that they uploaded it to the internet, so some non-US person could download a copy. I think in the case of handguns, it's a clear case of censorship (given the second amendment right to own handguns, prohibiting distributing relevant data is an end-run around this). In the case of battleships, it's not obviously unreasonable to prevent persons from designing battleships and selling the plans to non-allied nation states. In the case of launch vehicles (which are practically ICBMs), there's more of a gray area.
Also on the ITAR list are such things as cellphone SIMs and other hardware-based cryptographic tools. Yeah, PGP can be freely exported now, but there's still a large list of "gray area" things that use the same export paperwork as nuclear weapons.
And along with that, there are the export restrictions to countries like Iran, N. Korea, etc... these plans would definitely run afoul of those restrictions if the site isn't actively blocking those countries. However, if the guy sets things up in the same way Phil Zimmerman did back in the day for PGP, there shouldn't be an issue.
Now, how many lives do you think would be lost because they were not able to defend themselves against a home invader, carjacker or mugger on the street still armed with knives, clubs & broken bottles?
It's not as simple of math as you think, no matter how unfortunate.
Not simple indeed -- if violent offenders didn't have guns, the fallback items would be knives, clubs, broken bottles and syringes. All of these are in-close items, which means carjackings would likely go way down, muggings would be against people perceptibly weaker, and broken bottle fights would still end up in ER.
I'd definitely wonder whether things such as slings, shruiken and crossbows would make a comeback, however (on both sides of the equation).
This goes back to the discussion somewhere up the thread... older coders generally admit to not knowing things they don't know, know a *way* to do things, and know what doesn't work.
So when they have a "best practices" way of handling something, and someone comes out with some method outside of that that they haven't used before, they're more than happy to say "Hmm... I've never done it that way before; I'm not sure what you mean..." which often means "Is he really suggesting we do it THAT way? Surely he's aware of the pitfalls; maybe he's got some new angle on it, let's hear him out."
In your case, filtering is the reactive way to do it. The code should be set up such that characters outside the accepted set aren't allowed in the first place, say by using prepared statements. If you're at the point where a string needs to be filtered to protect your DB, you've already done something wrong.
Actually, for canvassing CVs, get rid of all experience not directly related to the job you're applying for. Try to make it all fit on one page. Make sure your CV touches on all the points mentioned in the job ad.
The rest comes out as you say, during the interview with the tech manager. And remember: you're interviewing the tech manager as much as they're interviewing you. If they're not a good fit, don't take the job. You might also want to let HR know why you declined the offer.
Personally, I've been hosting my own private collection for years, thanks to NAS and a VPN.
As an alternative....
Your alternative to my alternative appears very similar to what I stated :D
Make sure to share the software when you're done :)
Personally, I've been hosting my own private collection for years, thanks to NAS and a VPN.
As an alternative, amazingly, Apple seems to "get it" here with their $25/year Match program too -- anything you sync through their service comes with full service, no ads, and you sync the music and playlists to your devices, so if ITS and Match ever vanish, you've still got everything. Google seems to be catching on as well, but they still want you to put everything on their servers for the most part (but make it really convenient to do so).
The feds I've talked to at conferences generally don't mind, as long as there's no associated publicity that goes outside the conference -- that is, they don't want to be on someone's blog, and especially don't want to show up on a news site. Probably because they're at the conference on the government dime.
You do realize that MacKeeper is a Russian product, right? Amusingly, Kaspersky is the one AV outfit that outright blocks them.
MacKeeper works via the partnerka system -- affiliate downloads. Many of their affiliates are from the Russian underworld, and own other properties such as porn and warez sites.
Obviously, the debug port is so that their new wrist strap can take skin samples and sequence your DNA right in the strap/watch!
It adds a new "layer" of "security" as well. :D
Considering the fact that some thieves have been caught after they used a stolen phone to post geolocated selfies to the victims' Instagram or Facebook account, I think that for the most part, low-brow thieves are by definition some kind of stupid.
If you have attention to detail, patience and intelligence, you realize that there are easier ways to make money than petty theft.
Ooh; I've got some old drive platters around somewhere that would make good toilet seat lids....