Honestly, this is along the lines of the best option. You have to consider that even if you could get a device to store the bits for 20 years. eg hard disk and freezer comes to mind. But you are still fighting the format war. Imagine reading any media from 1998 that was readily available:)
So in my opinion (and practice). The best way is to go media-less, I use Mozy backup for all this (they were recently bought out by EMC if that makes you feel better). I have a windows pro box on my network with a share that all my PCs point to. This PC in turn backs up to Mozy online real time. I have about 20GB uploaded to it right now. You will still want to snapshot every once in a while for backups but it is better than putting on a disk and throwing into a storage unit for 20 years. You also get to access all your files from anywhere in the world.
To make you think here, what happens when a current plant fails? Think of what supplies the power in your area, what if it got hit by a natural disaster.
ummmm what part of my post did you skip? Im guessing all of it.
FTP "Where did we come up with this idea that our power has to come from a single plant? These neighborhoods that already do this pump power back into the grid and get paid per kW hour.
The grid still exists with thousands of more backups than this crappy single power plant for millions of homes problem we have. However, we still have a central power plant because honestly we cant live without one.
if you ever come up with one, the people whose job it is to actually keep the lights on would just love to hear from you.
This isnt a proposed solution that might work in theory that I came up with over a couple beers. This is already done across the US, I will let you google for it, it is not my job to think for you. The problem with the solution is that it is not cool to have a solar panel off the top of your house. The other problem is, it is so dammed expensive the only people that will put a panel on their house are upper middle class and eco nuts. It is sooooo much cheaper to make a power plant for companies that the way to go is just that.
Now imagine in 40-50 years a power grid with nuclear reactors supplimented by home solar panels across the US. We wont need half the reactors currently projected if any, many towns will be completely self sufficient pumping power back into the grid for the towns that are not. Now where the theory lies is in the grid configuration, you would have the power companies essentially directing the flow and storing energy in spots that are not self sufficient. This system is as indestructible and impervious as the internet. It also allows for the growth of human dependence on electricity. People don't just use solar, they could use wind, or hydro, or geo depending on the abundance in their region.
My crackpot idea is that we need to take what is already done in small grids throughout the US and apply the idea widely, start spreading the idea that instead of power plants giving all our energy, we can distribute the translation of energy over continents.
have I worked with you? I was at a place where the root/admin passwords hadn't been changed in over 15 years. This was a Law enforcement agency too....I think they may have changed them by now...
my mistake. Although I did hear about a solar Prius hybrid supposedly coming out in the next 2 years. Haven't researched it to back up the rumor, guess I can do that now;)
You would think. Im not an alarmist but go out and rent "who killed the electric car" for an insightful documentary.
It is a prime example of a product that sold like hotcakes, high profit margin, and was simply deleted from the market. They don't put the blame on any once source in the documentary and do a decent job of presenting the situation
A step towards energy efficiency, not the solution itself. Although there is a lot to be said for a distributed power generation system. You would have redundancy, abundance, and other pros. Right now I think the best thing today in the here and now is a combination of nuclear and solar. Home users of power need to start becoming part of the solution. If you can afford it, get solar panels to reduce your dependency on centralized power plants.
This isnt something that is going to happen overnight, this is a 20-30 year solution, it will take time. If more houses can become less dependent on power plants this will reduce stress on the grid. The other route is to become a greenie and stop using PCs and AC at your home. Only use light when absolutely necessary. You and I both know THAT ain't gonna happen.
Interesting input, I don't think solar is necessarily going to be a solve all but a supplement to existing solutions. For those that can afford it is is really nice, unfortunately I am against gov't controlled power so that puts people in a bit of a pickle when they cannot afford it, thus we will always be reliant on 3rd party power.
But this system is kind of nice in the US because rather than relying on the inefficient gov't to do all this, we have cool things like, refunds for generating power here. Which is a kind of nice incentive for people to start doing it. And as with anything in a capitalistic society, if we can get demand and supply to go up then we should see prices drop so lower classes can follow through. But admittedly this is a bit of an altruistic concept.
Ok I know you are being funny but your sarcasm states the ignorance of many people. I am not a tree hugger or a hemp wearing technophobe. But good god man, are you really this obtuse? Rather than refuting my statements with facts you dance around trying to be funny rather than actually discuss the issue.
However, if you would get off your ignorant horse for 2 seconds and really look at energy consumption in the US, there are some wonderful proof of concepts available.
It is dumbasses like yourself which are the reason we are in the energy crisis we are in. Rather than thinking of a distributed solution you only think in traditional "this is the way pa did it and this is the way we will do it".
When you consider that a single 100 square mile section of solar panels can power the US (solar4power.com if you wanna check the math) and a distributed system with solar panels on roofs can easily do that your jest becomes just less funny. Where did we come up with this idea that our power has to come from a single plant? These neighborhoods that already do this pump power back into the grid and get paid per kW hour. Now in your world where everyone is in darkness all the time this is a problem. However, in the real world it is always light somewhere, even in a single power district. Not to mention batteries are readily available to solve those issues where someone didn't want to tap into the power grid.
Now with this extra energy that is dirt cheap (even after the cost of installing solar panels), you can start using your electric cars and hybrids more efficiently. We can lower our dependence on oil and non-reliable fuels in a couple decades as the infrastructure upgrades itself through new housing projects and grants to upgrade old houses.
But here is the rub, people like you are constantly beating the issue down so we can continue to pay billions a year in energy costs to third parties. Joking about a very serious issue and just like Nuclear power being practically killed a couple decades ago by alarmist jackasses like yourself. Solar alternatives are being squashed as well.
Of course what do I expect from slashdot, you as a flamer are part of the problem rather than the solution.
I have a friend of mine who is an engineer for the public power district out here. He mentioned that Nuclear power has come a long way in being efficient with it's waste product. Eg recycling it back into the plant and whatnot. So I think as we get more nuclear power plants going and more resources pushed in that direction we will see even higher efficiency levels.
However, the greatest untapped energy source is, and always will be the sun. Things like using solar panels at your house and being more energy efficient will be our greatest step towards solving our energy problems. People themselves need to start taking their energy use into their own hands. Their are entire neighborhoods in the US who are self sufficient and actually give energy back. There is no reason why this idea cannot spread to more of the US. So rather than relying on 3rd party for all your needs, start thinking of how you can help at home.
Yes I explained that when I said in a previous post that it is such a young field that no one knows what to do with it. Project managers in other fields don't have these problems as much because their area is defined. See, manufacturing, marketing, research..etc. It is also why I said the main problem is that for some reason people dont apply their usual business logic to IT.
Of course there are few other departments that effect your business logic the way IT does. But I think in 10 years or so after we see several billion lost in poorly managed projects the problems will iron themselves out as the position becomes better defined.
You obviously have not ever been around a real project manager. What you have described is effectively what the problem is. We have glorified chart monkeys that make things look pretty and essentially report what they see and half the time they don't know what they are looking at. They dont just walk around with a coffee cup and waste time. Real project managers are far far from what you just explained.
A real project manager understands the scope of the project, can foresee hitches and they deal with unknown ones effectively. They earn the respect of their team through respecting their decisions and delegating power accordingly. They make sure that people aren't acting in areas they shouldn't and effectively direct the project to completion.
Well then it comes down to the hiring process and weighing the individual. But my original point here was, I have worked with people from all walks of IT. Some of the best I have worked with ahve been certophobes, some of the WORST (and I mean bad) have been paper MCSEs. But far worse than the paper MCSEs (cause at least they are microsoft one trick ponies), are the ego centric hobbists that really really cause problems because they are too lazy, or arrogant to further their knowledge or to follow RFC specs. Next thing you know you have massive breaches, networks so script filled that there is only one person on the planet that can fix them, or code that is so gawd aweful that it causes hundreds of thousands of dollars to correct.
An effort needs to be made to show the non-tech individuals that you are worth your salt, if you dont then they have good reason to throw you out the door. This is extra important in IT because of the weight on us, I would say the only other department that can cause such chaos to a business is the accounting department.
That is what I was getting at. In my opinion you need PMs with some real world experience working in projects. After all you need to know what is going on below before you can paint the big picture. However, a PM should only report to the CEO, cut out all the bull. Get the project scope and draw out the details then let the PM take over. Don't fire, rehire or expand without the PM's explicit permission. At best the CEO should be asking members of the project team to review the PM to make sure they are competent but other than that, the project should be hands off to anyone not building said item. Every time a PM leaves, moves on, or gets screwed with you start to see scope creep and all your devs start to look at classifieds.
Exactly, all of which cascades from a lack of project management. IT project managers are soooo rare no adays that everyone is scrambling to hire them. A good IT project manager will manage each of the problems you noted above. Sys Admins and Dev Gurus are not Project managers. But they get put in the position of being one constantly because upper management doesn't know the difference. It is a completely different skill set. You wouldn't make a simple accountant a CFO or your HR manager a CEO. Sure there is an aspect of accounting to beinging a CFO and there is an aspect of HR to CEO but those are well defined fields that people know how to sniff out good fits for them. However the Professional IT project manager is such a new concept that general managers think any IT guy can fit the bill.
It all comes down to the fact that somehow the common business sense that people have in every other area seems to go out the window while they are thinking about IT.
I view these problems as a direct result in regards to a lack of IT project managers. Even being a seasoned IT professional I wouldn't even begin to imagine the difficulties in managing a large IT project beginning to end. In my experience I have noticed in run-away projects or in slow moving projects, the problems usually are attributed to a change of project managers. I would urge any company with an IT project to do whatever they can to maintain their PMs with any incentives possible. Because the fallout is financially distressing to ANY company.
LOL, im sorry you went MS in CS;) I thought about it but realized quickly that academia professions weren't for me and A MS in CS is only good for academia. However I have found that in the IS professions, BSCS individuals tend to be more reliable individuals than those without.
I didn't say anything about a MCSE, there are other certs out there, some good ones too. The idea is to look for certs that actually have weight, not just getting an MCSE badge or a CCNA badge. Look into VMWare Certs, or things like Backtrack certs. One way or another you have to prove yourself to your employers and prospective employers. That means either making a name in your industry, getting frilly things after your name, or be one hell of an interviewee. Certs dont guarantee you know everything, they just mean that you learned what was intended, but if you don't use the knowledge afterwards you will forget it just like anything else.
Also, I can smell a paper cert individual a mile away and so can most real IT Pros.
An IT worker with over 12 of experience should not need a silly piece of paper to prove his worth. It is this arrogance that shoots companies in the foot. Now I am sure you are a competent IT person, however what separates you from the 12 year IT worker who spent most of it playing solitaire and barely holding the network together?
Once again I am not a cert boy, I have no certifications, I have a BS in CS. But yes, you would have to prove yourself to me if you ever came across my hiring table. Maybe not with certs, but you would have to show more than just your good word that your 12 years of experience is worth more than just 12 years with a title. A certification (better have multiple if you don't have an IT degree of some kind) shows that at least you have an aptitude for the stuff. The interview would sort out whether or not you could creatively use the knowledge.
BTW I used to think as you do, there is no difference between the guy with the cert and the guy without who read all the material. But that is just a cop-out answer because if you really do know all that the other guy does, there is no reason you wouldnt have paid your $$$ to take the test.
Well I am not a cert boy myself, I believe my BS speaks for itself. However, I maintain that one of the biggest problems IT faces right now is not the end user but the inept IT staff members that came out of the dotcom rush for workers. These people are now management and all over the place while there is a gigantic pool of IT people that hit the market in 2002 or so to pull from.
But now these people are entrenched, getting a good paycheck and compromising systems all over the world. They wont move either because they are woefully under qualified and no one else will hire them.
The only way to start weeding these people out is to test their practical knowledge in some way, an audit or anything. But if they are chasing after certs it at least shows that they have passion for what they do or are interested in learning more.
1. Hire competent IT people, don't promote mailroom boy to Admin because he can fix spyware.
2. Continuing education for your IT people.
3. Just because someone looks old, doesn't make them a competent 'seasoned' IT guy.
4. Respect your IT pro's opinions.
We all have a plethora of stories of users, but even more of fellow co-workers in over their heads causing massive damage. Sometimes it goes unseen, other times it can desecrate a business. Make sure your IT people are educated, have a passion for what they do. Not just a paycheck monkey draining your resources.
A good test here, if your IT head is an ex-HR manager, mailroom clerk, secretary, or other far removed profession and have yet to get any certifications or degrees to prove their competence after 10 years then you probably are in trouble. Not in every case, but enough to make you worry.
Im not saying that a cert or degree proves that you are competent, but it at least shows that you try to be.
Being married to a female geek, you hit the nail on the head with your statement. I wish this would catch on faster, different but equal needs to become a catchphrase in society before 1984 becomes a reality.
Slashdot Mirror
So in my opinion (and practice). The best way is to go media-less, I use Mozy backup for all this (they were recently bought out by EMC if that makes you feel better). I have a windows pro box on my network with a share that all my PCs point to. This PC in turn backs up to Mozy online real time. I have about 20GB uploaded to it right now. You will still want to snapshot every once in a while for backups but it is better than putting on a disk and throwing into a storage unit for 20 years. You also get to access all your files from anywhere in the world.
ok, now you made me laugh :)
To make you think here, what happens when a current plant fails? Think of what supplies the power in your area, what if it got hit by a natural disaster.
FTP "Where did we come up with this idea that our power has to come from a single plant? These neighborhoods that already do this pump power back into the grid and get paid per kW hour.
The grid still exists with thousands of more backups than this crappy single power plant for millions of homes problem we have. However, we still have a central power plant because honestly we cant live without one.if you ever come up with one, the people whose job it is to actually keep the lights on would just love to hear from you. This isnt a proposed solution that might work in theory that I came up with over a couple beers. This is already done across the US, I will let you google for it, it is not my job to think for you. The problem with the solution is that it is not cool to have a solar panel off the top of your house. The other problem is, it is so dammed expensive the only people that will put a panel on their house are upper middle class and eco nuts. It is sooooo much cheaper to make a power plant for companies that the way to go is just that.
Now imagine in 40-50 years a power grid with nuclear reactors supplimented by home solar panels across the US. We wont need half the reactors currently projected if any, many towns will be completely self sufficient pumping power back into the grid for the towns that are not. Now where the theory lies is in the grid configuration, you would have the power companies essentially directing the flow and storing energy in spots that are not self sufficient. This system is as indestructible and impervious as the internet. It also allows for the growth of human dependence on electricity. People don't just use solar, they could use wind, or hydro, or geo depending on the abundance in their region.
My crackpot idea is that we need to take what is already done in small grids throughout the US and apply the idea widely, start spreading the idea that instead of power plants giving all our energy, we can distribute the translation of energy over continents.
have I worked with you? I was at a place where the root/admin passwords hadn't been changed in over 15 years. This was a Law enforcement agency too....I think they may have changed them by now...
Do that, and suffer my wrath. preach it brother!
my mistake. Although I did hear about a solar Prius hybrid supposedly coming out in the next 2 years. Haven't researched it to back up the rumor, guess I can do that now ;)
Plug in cars arent a few years away, we are a few years past them....http://www.sonyclassics.com/whokilledtheelectriccar/
It is a prime example of a product that sold like hotcakes, high profit margin, and was simply deleted from the market. They don't put the blame on any once source in the documentary and do a decent job of presenting the situation
This isnt something that is going to happen overnight, this is a 20-30 year solution, it will take time. If more houses can become less dependent on power plants this will reduce stress on the grid. The other route is to become a greenie and stop using PCs and AC at your home. Only use light when absolutely necessary. You and I both know THAT ain't gonna happen.
But this system is kind of nice in the US because rather than relying on the inefficient gov't to do all this, we have cool things like, refunds for generating power here. Which is a kind of nice incentive for people to start doing it. And as with anything in a capitalistic society, if we can get demand and supply to go up then we should see prices drop so lower classes can follow through. But admittedly this is a bit of an altruistic concept.
rant mode
Ok I know you are being funny but your sarcasm states the ignorance of many people. I am not a tree hugger or a hemp wearing technophobe. But good god man, are you really this obtuse? Rather than refuting my statements with facts you dance around trying to be funny rather than actually discuss the issue.
However, if you would get off your ignorant horse for 2 seconds and really look at energy consumption in the US, there are some wonderful proof of concepts available.
It is dumbasses like yourself which are the reason we are in the energy crisis we are in. Rather than thinking of a distributed solution you only think in traditional "this is the way pa did it and this is the way we will do it".
When you consider that a single 100 square mile section of solar panels can power the US (solar4power.com if you wanna check the math) and a distributed system with solar panels on roofs can easily do that your jest becomes just less funny. Where did we come up with this idea that our power has to come from a single plant? These neighborhoods that already do this pump power back into the grid and get paid per kW hour. Now in your world where everyone is in darkness all the time this is a problem. However, in the real world it is always light somewhere, even in a single power district. Not to mention batteries are readily available to solve those issues where someone didn't want to tap into the power grid.
Now with this extra energy that is dirt cheap (even after the cost of installing solar panels), you can start using your electric cars and hybrids more efficiently. We can lower our dependence on oil and non-reliable fuels in a couple decades as the infrastructure upgrades itself through new housing projects and grants to upgrade old houses.
But here is the rub, people like you are constantly beating the issue down so we can continue to pay billions a year in energy costs to third parties. Joking about a very serious issue and just like Nuclear power being practically killed a couple decades ago by alarmist jackasses like yourself. Solar alternatives are being squashed as well.
Of course what do I expect from slashdot, you as a flamer are part of the problem rather than the solution.
However, the greatest untapped energy source is, and always will be the sun. Things like using solar panels at your house and being more energy efficient will be our greatest step towards solving our energy problems. People themselves need to start taking their energy use into their own hands. Their are entire neighborhoods in the US who are self sufficient and actually give energy back. There is no reason why this idea cannot spread to more of the US. So rather than relying on 3rd party for all your needs, start thinking of how you can help at home.
Tigerdotted
I Got wooded?
ok /.ers you can do better. I need to update my ids logs to take this into consideration ;)
Of course there are few other departments that effect your business logic the way IT does. But I think in 10 years or so after we see several billion lost in poorly managed projects the problems will iron themselves out as the position becomes better defined.
A real project manager understands the scope of the project, can foresee hitches and they deal with unknown ones effectively. They earn the respect of their team through respecting their decisions and delegating power accordingly. They make sure that people aren't acting in areas they shouldn't and effectively direct the project to completion.
An effort needs to be made to show the non-tech individuals that you are worth your salt, if you dont then they have good reason to throw you out the door. This is extra important in IT because of the weight on us, I would say the only other department that can cause such chaos to a business is the accounting department.
That is what I was getting at. In my opinion you need PMs with some real world experience working in projects. After all you need to know what is going on below before you can paint the big picture. However, a PM should only report to the CEO, cut out all the bull. Get the project scope and draw out the details then let the PM take over. Don't fire, rehire or expand without the PM's explicit permission. At best the CEO should be asking members of the project team to review the PM to make sure they are competent but other than that, the project should be hands off to anyone not building said item. Every time a PM leaves, moves on, or gets screwed with you start to see scope creep and all your devs start to look at classifieds.
It all comes down to the fact that somehow the common business sense that people have in every other area seems to go out the window while they are thinking about IT.
I view these problems as a direct result in regards to a lack of IT project managers. Even being a seasoned IT professional I wouldn't even begin to imagine the difficulties in managing a large IT project beginning to end. In my experience I have noticed in run-away projects or in slow moving projects, the problems usually are attributed to a change of project managers. I would urge any company with an IT project to do whatever they can to maintain their PMs with any incentives possible. Because the fallout is financially distressing to ANY company.
I didn't say anything about a MCSE, there are other certs out there, some good ones too. The idea is to look for certs that actually have weight, not just getting an MCSE badge or a CCNA badge. Look into VMWare Certs, or things like Backtrack certs. One way or another you have to prove yourself to your employers and prospective employers. That means either making a name in your industry, getting frilly things after your name, or be one hell of an interviewee. Certs dont guarantee you know everything, they just mean that you learned what was intended, but if you don't use the knowledge afterwards you will forget it just like anything else.
Also, I can smell a paper cert individual a mile away and so can most real IT Pros.
Once again I am not a cert boy, I have no certifications, I have a BS in CS. But yes, you would have to prove yourself to me if you ever came across my hiring table. Maybe not with certs, but you would have to show more than just your good word that your 12 years of experience is worth more than just 12 years with a title. A certification (better have multiple if you don't have an IT degree of some kind) shows that at least you have an aptitude for the stuff. The interview would sort out whether or not you could creatively use the knowledge.
BTW I used to think as you do, there is no difference between the guy with the cert and the guy without who read all the material. But that is just a cop-out answer because if you really do know all that the other guy does, there is no reason you wouldnt have paid your $$$ to take the test.
But now these people are entrenched, getting a good paycheck and compromising systems all over the world. They wont move either because they are woefully under qualified and no one else will hire them.
The only way to start weeding these people out is to test their practical knowledge in some way, an audit or anything. But if they are chasing after certs it at least shows that they have passion for what they do or are interested in learning more.
2. Continuing education for your IT people.
3. Just because someone looks old, doesn't make them a competent 'seasoned' IT guy.
4. Respect your IT pro's opinions.
We all have a plethora of stories of users, but even more of fellow co-workers in over their heads causing massive damage. Sometimes it goes unseen, other times it can desecrate a business. Make sure your IT people are educated, have a passion for what they do. Not just a paycheck monkey draining your resources.
A good test here, if your IT head is an ex-HR manager, mailroom clerk, secretary, or other far removed profession and have yet to get any certifications or degrees to prove their competence after 10 years then you probably are in trouble. Not in every case, but enough to make you worry.
Im not saying that a cert or degree proves that you are competent, but it at least shows that you try to be.
Being married to a female geek, you hit the nail on the head with your statement. I wish this would catch on faster, different but equal needs to become a catchphrase in society before 1984 becomes a reality.