This brings up the age old debate which I will not revive. However, my spin is that if you are patching a vulnerability you should disclose that. Otherwise the end user might not apply the patch. This very same situation happened with Cisco at Blackhat and ended up in the Courts and Cisco ended up with a public black-eye. Based upon the IT reaction to that I would venture the assumption that we want to know.
For pure information I would agree I hardly go past the first few pages. However, if I am looking for a product then I do go past three. The reason is that there are so many filtered doorways and spam link pages or other non-relevant pages mentioning the product that they crud up the search. Even Froogle doesn't hit it right the first time all the time.
I have had a throw away hotmail account for years and have never had a problem with it. Email always arrives, is always sent and no spam other than the ones I send there.
I use daily throw away lenses. Never had a problem unless I was in front of a computer 12 hours. Daily lenses are so much better as they keep hydrated longer. Not too much difference in price.
If you find your eyes are drying out take out the lenses and rub in solution (watch out for some solutions causing eye fungus) and then pop them back in. This will extend the hydration for a while.
I was under the impression that Yahoo! mail was free. Isn't the rule you get what you pay for? Seriously though, why would Yahoo put a ton of money into something which is not a revenue generator. Free email is so yesterday.
And if you don't like what I am saying you can reach me at:
server-never-works@yahoo.com
and really let me know how you feel about this. Well, you can at least reach 7 to 55% of the time.
Read the article and the real reason is plain as day:
"The main holdups were a copyright protection mechanism for the PS3's high-definition DVD player." Yeah, right, top of the line cool features are delaying shipment. By the way, I have a bridge I want to sell you; and Vista is shipping this month!!
>>I don't want solutions that entail using the command line.
It sounds like the Mac Soup Nazi. God forbid someone would actually use the keyboard for anything. In fact all computers should only have a Mouse attached and a on screen keyboard in which you click letters.
I would say it does. I use the calendar beta right now (definately not for production use) and have several problems: calendars don't appear in the list or on the calendar but are there, events do not always appear after entering them (maybe a 20 minute delay--this is probably a server problem not code), drag and drop not dragging, etc.
While it is interesting . . . but if you have ever tried dual booting with Windows the first couple of times you always find out that Windows will boot and the other operating system is screwed up. I mean seriously - when has dual booting with Windows "ever" worked out of the box? It seeks always to dominate and does not ever like to share.
And people, people, please figure out what a beta is... sheesh.
I totally agree. While everyone here may be able to know what a fcsk does, when to do it and how to manually partition their stage 1 Gentoo install, the rest of the world does not. Most business, surprise, surprise, and in the business to do their business. And that is usually not IT, it is something else they know about. They need the server as a tool to further proceed in their business, not an end all solution for the IT guys.
I have both ATT/SBC DSL and Comcast HSI at my home. Comcast runs at a constant 3-4 Mbps (advertised 6 Mbps). DSL is a steady 1.5 Mbps.
I can tell you from experience that Comcast is a lot faster. It's not the backbone that is the problem--it is the end mile from the local ISP to me. Whenever there is a problem it is 99.999% the problem of the last ISP to me.
The guy is just spinning because they want to save money right now. They figure (and probably rightly so) that they can deliver faster service by not going the last distance to the premises and save money. Later they can finish it off when they need more bandwidth, which will probably cost less since the technology will go down in price. They are probably doing this because they don't yet have the content to use all the bandwidth for pure fiber to the house, so why put it in?
That is easy to figure out. You sue the person/company with the cash.
That means anyone making money off linux or using linux. Just like SCO delivered warning letters for anyone using the 2.4 kernel before their big lawsuit (we got one of these from SCO's general counsel), Microsoft will do the same. Lawsuits follow the cash and therefore IBM will be the first sued.
If you don't have your speakers loud enough to drown out everything else (fans, hard drive spinning, mouse movement, internet chatter, tv, radio, wife/girlfriend/so, mom calling you from upstairs, party next door, fire engines, police sirens on street, helicopter circling above your house, swat loudspeaker outside...) then clearly you need a better sound system and/or need to turn up the volume.
If you have a fantastic speaker system on your gaming computer and have the volume way up then you don't need to worry about any fan noise...you won't hear anything else.
This is important stuff as more and more phone traffic is routing open in the internet. While most people do not believe their emails are totally private, when it comes to talking on the phone I believe there is a perception (and assumption) that no one else is listening. SIP, Asterisk and all the flavors of VOIP is changing telecom and encryption is necessary.
I didn't even know they dropped the SUSE name. I guess maybe they didn't market the other name very well. (They might want to try to brand SUSE a little better).
I guess this is where my assumption would differ. I assume that being able to communicate clearly is a level expected and would be monitored and fixed if it fell below the standard (i.e., can't understand someone).
Okay, I understand Slashdot seeks subjects which spur debate but this one is on the edge. First this is a study which is "predicting." That's the first clue that something is wrong about this, you can make stastics say anything you want. But the real problem here is that they automatically assume that outsourcing will result in a bad experience. Who says? You can have a bad experience with a customer service person (who is American) and just doesn't give a damn. There is no golden rule that the people working for you have any more motivation to help you than an outsourced worker. The article quotes human nature as why they won't identify with the organization...bull. This is nothing but a hyper-general statement to support their conclusions. (Aside from the words likely to, tend to, which are all assumptions.)
The real problem is not that there are companies which are outsourcing -- it is that companies are not caring whether the service rendered is good enough to begin with. If you set a level of expectation for anyone working on your behalf and follow through to ensure that level is being reached it won't matter whether you have employees working at home, in the office or in another country. Far too many companies simply outsource and say do it without monitoring the level of communications to make sure they are doing it right. Saying that outsourcing will automatically cause problems is just an over generalized conclusion.
The one point they did get right though is that it is silly just to compete on price alone. That is actually true, however, they are trying to make this point by generalizing on something which may or may not be true and by missing the real point of customer service.
Requiring a laptop will not help a student get better grades. Far too often people don't realize that a computer is just a tool which enables you to do something else more efficient. It is not the end all solution to every problem. Unless the computer is needed in the class or you suck at hand-writing notes there is no need for it (and no, IM the cute girl one row over doesn't count as a need). I've had quite a few college classes and I am willing to say less than 5% need a laptop as a course requirement. This seems more like the school is saying we are on the cutting edge because every student uses a laptop. Big whip, show me where this is definately improving grades, quality of work or anything else.
Is the real problem the law, homeland security or just the people in the position?
I think the problem here is that you have individuals who went outside the boundry of what they are supposed to do. Yes, it is wrong. However, do you know blame the law or the agency they work for? Isn't it just a problem with these knuckleheads? They were doing something they were supposed to be doing. I think it is more of a people problem, rather than a problem with the law. If they were doing what they were supposed to do, and their manager making sure they are doing what they are supposed to do none of this would have happened.
People make mistakes all the time, but it seems nowdays we blame the law or organization for the actions of a few. I think we should blame the law or the organization in certain cases but this isn't this just the case here. We all have *quasi-idiots* working around us at times. Just as they do not define who we are I don't think it is fair to say Homeland Security is therefore bad.
The amateur regulations were redefined because at that time the Soviet-bloc had paid "professionals" representing them at the Olympics. While they were not "professionals" in the Olympic definition (i.e., money for sport's performance) they were given token jobs in government or the military while for their day job they practiced their Olympic sport. You were talking about teams which had practiced together every day for eight years and whose only goal was to win gold at the Olympics. Contrast that against the majority of the other competitors at that time and you usually had a mismatch.
I understand the reason for the change, but I think it did take something out. Take for example the 1980 US hockey win against the Soviets. Why is that so famous? Because a team of college kids beat the most "professional" hockey team at that time. It was a big win because amateurs beat the professionals. (Yes, I know Team USA practiced for over a year before the Olympics but that was nothing compared to the years of practice for the Soviets).
Now, today in 2006, the US hockey team flew in the day before from all their NHL teams and then went on the ice the next day to play against Lativia. What is amazing in this 2006 game is that the "basically amateur" team from Lativia tied the NHL *super-stars*. Team Lativia went nuts after the game because they should have blown out. It made a big story because the professionals were almost beaten.
For the NHL professionals (or any other professional competing) this is not something they are dying to win. A lot of the time they are more worried about their National endorsements (think basketball star controversy) and/or they are worried about not going all out because they might get hurt and injure themselves and hurt their professional career. (Yes, not all think like this, but enough do which takes away some of the spirit of the games.)
Which would you rather see? A young amateur who goes all out and wins a gold after years of practice or a paid professional taking a week off from their competitive sport so they can try to pump up their professional career and get more shoe endorsements?
Slashdot Mirror
This brings up the age old debate which I will not revive. However, my spin is that if you are patching a vulnerability you should disclose that. Otherwise the end user might not apply the patch. This very same situation happened with Cisco at Blackhat and ended up in the Courts and Cisco ended up with a public black-eye. Based upon the IT reaction to that I would venture the assumption that we want to know.
For pure information I would agree I hardly go past the first few pages. However, if I am looking for a product then I do go past three. The reason is that there are so many filtered doorways and spam link pages or other non-relevant pages mentioning the product that they crud up the search. Even Froogle doesn't hit it right the first time all the time.
Really?
I have had a throw away hotmail account for years and have never had a problem with it. Email always arrives, is always sent and no spam other than the ones I send there.
I use daily throw away lenses. Never had a problem unless I was in front of a computer 12 hours. Daily lenses are so much better as they keep hydrated longer. Not too much difference in price.
If you find your eyes are drying out take out the lenses and rub in solution (watch out for some solutions causing eye fungus) and then pop them back in. This will extend the hydration for a while.
I was under the impression that Yahoo! mail was free. Isn't the rule you get what you pay for? Seriously though, why would Yahoo put a ton of money into something which is not a revenue generator. Free email is so yesterday.
And if you don't like what I am saying you can reach me at:
server-never-works@yahoo.com
and really let me know how you feel about this. Well, you can at least reach 7 to 55% of the time.
Read the article and the real reason is plain as day:
"The main holdups were a copyright protection mechanism for the PS3's high-definition DVD player."
Yeah, right, top of the line cool features are delaying shipment. By the way, I have a bridge I want to sell you; and Vista is shipping this month!!
>>I don't want solutions that entail using the command line.
It sounds like the Mac Soup Nazi. God forbid someone would actually use the keyboard for anything. In fact all computers should only have a Mouse attached and a on screen keyboard in which you click letters.
"NO KEYBOARD FOR YOU!"
I would say it does. I use the calendar beta right now (definately not for production use) and have several problems: calendars don't appear in the list or on the calendar but are there, events do not always appear after entering them (maybe a 20 minute delay--this is probably a server problem not code), drag and drop not dragging, etc.
While it is interesting . . . but if you have ever tried dual booting with Windows the first couple of times you always find out that Windows will boot and the other operating system is screwed up. I mean seriously - when has dual booting with Windows "ever" worked out of the box? It seeks always to dominate and does not ever like to share.
And people, people, please figure out what a beta is... sheesh.
I totally agree. While everyone here may be able to know what a fcsk does, when to do it and how to manually partition their stage 1 Gentoo install, the rest of the world does not. Most business, surprise, surprise, and in the business to do their business. And that is usually not IT, it is something else they know about. They need the server as a tool to further proceed in their business, not an end all solution for the IT guys.
I have both ATT/SBC DSL and Comcast HSI at my home. Comcast runs at a constant 3-4 Mbps (advertised 6 Mbps). DSL is a steady 1.5 Mbps.
I can tell you from experience that Comcast is a lot faster. It's not the backbone that is the problem--it is the end mile from the local ISP to me. Whenever there is a problem it is 99.999% the problem of the last ISP to me.
The guy is just spinning because they want to save money right now. They figure (and probably rightly so) that they can deliver faster service by not going the last distance to the premises and save money. Later they can finish it off when they need more bandwidth, which will probably cost less since the technology will go down in price. They are probably doing this because they don't yet have the content to use all the bandwidth for pure fiber to the house, so why put it in?
It will be available as soon as Vista ships . . . around 2Q 2010.
That is easy to figure out. You sue the person/company with the cash.
That means anyone making money off linux or using linux. Just like SCO delivered warning letters for anyone using the 2.4 kernel before their big lawsuit (we got one of these from SCO's general counsel), Microsoft will do the same. Lawsuits follow the cash and therefore IBM will be the first sued.
And if they forgot their password to the account they could just get the Justice Department to subpoena their emails for them...
If you don't have your speakers loud enough to drown out everything else (fans, hard drive spinning, mouse movement, internet chatter, tv, radio, wife/girlfriend/so, mom calling you from upstairs, party next door, fire engines, police sirens on street, helicopter circling above your house, swat loudspeaker outside...) then clearly you need a better sound system and/or need to turn up the volume.
If you have a fantastic speaker system on your gaming computer and have the volume way up then you don't need to worry about any fan noise...you won't hear anything else.
This is important stuff as more and more phone traffic is routing open in the internet. While most people do not believe their emails are totally private, when it comes to talking on the phone I believe there is a perception (and assumption) that no one else is listening. SIP, Asterisk and all the flavors of VOIP is changing telecom and encryption is necessary.
I didn't even know they dropped the SUSE name. I guess maybe they didn't market the other name very well. (They might want to try to brand SUSE a little better).
You also spent 20-30 minutes before the movie being subjected to advertising you couldn't skip, mute or otherwise avoid.
I guess this is where my assumption would differ. I assume that being able to communicate clearly is a level expected and would be monitored and fixed if it fell below the standard (i.e., can't understand someone).
From the article "A 2005 Gartner study predicts"
Okay, I understand Slashdot seeks subjects which spur debate but this one is on the edge. First this is a study which is "predicting." That's the first clue that something is wrong about this, you can make stastics say anything you want. But the real problem here is that they automatically assume that outsourcing will result in a bad experience. Who says? You can have a bad experience with a customer service person (who is American) and just doesn't give a damn. There is no golden rule that the people working for you have any more motivation to help you than an outsourced worker. The article quotes human nature as why they won't identify with the organization...bull. This is nothing but a hyper-general statement to support their conclusions. (Aside from the words likely to, tend to, which are all assumptions.)
The real problem is not that there are companies which are outsourcing -- it is that companies are not caring whether the service rendered is good enough to begin with. If you set a level of expectation for anyone working on your behalf and follow through to ensure that level is being reached it won't matter whether you have employees working at home, in the office or in another country. Far too many companies simply outsource and say do it without monitoring the level of communications to make sure they are doing it right. Saying that outsourcing will automatically cause problems is just an over generalized conclusion.
The one point they did get right though is that it is silly just to compete on price alone. That is actually true, however, they are trying to make this point by generalizing on something which may or may not be true and by missing the real point of customer service.
If you live in Texas you don't have to wait too long for this to come true: TXU to offer Broadband over Power Lines in 2006
Requiring a laptop will not help a student get better grades. Far too often people don't realize that a computer is just a tool which enables you to do something else more efficient. It is not the end all solution to every problem. Unless the computer is needed in the class or you suck at hand-writing notes there is no need for it (and no, IM the cute girl one row over doesn't count as a need). I've had quite a few college classes and I am willing to say less than 5% need a laptop as a course requirement. This seems more like the school is saying we are on the cutting edge because every student uses a laptop. Big whip, show me where this is definately improving grades, quality of work or anything else.
that the computer viruses of today will lead to spur computers to life?
(flame on hold)
Is the real problem the law, homeland security or just the people in the position?
I think the problem here is that you have individuals who went outside the boundry of what they are supposed to do. Yes, it is wrong. However, do you know blame the law or the agency they work for? Isn't it just a problem with these knuckleheads? They were doing something they were supposed to be doing. I think it is more of a people problem, rather than a problem with the law. If they were doing what they were supposed to do, and their manager making sure they are doing what they are supposed to do none of this would have happened.
People make mistakes all the time, but it seems nowdays we blame the law or organization for the actions of a few. I think we should blame the law or the organization in certain cases but this isn't this just the case here. We all have *quasi-idiots* working around us at times. Just as they do not define who we are I don't think it is fair to say Homeland Security is therefore bad.
(/flame on hold)
(flame on begin)
The amateur regulations were redefined because at that time the Soviet-bloc had paid "professionals" representing them at the Olympics. While they were not "professionals" in the Olympic definition (i.e., money for sport's performance) they were given token jobs in government or the military while for their day job they practiced their Olympic sport. You were talking about teams which had practiced together every day for eight years and whose only goal was to win gold at the Olympics. Contrast that against the majority of the other competitors at that time and you usually had a mismatch.
I understand the reason for the change, but I think it did take something out. Take for example the 1980 US hockey win against the Soviets. Why is that so famous? Because a team of college kids beat the most "professional" hockey team at that time. It was a big win because amateurs beat the professionals. (Yes, I know Team USA practiced for over a year before the Olympics but that was nothing compared to the years of practice for the Soviets).
Now, today in 2006, the US hockey team flew in the day before from all their NHL teams and then went on the ice the next day to play against Lativia. What is amazing in this 2006 game is that the "basically amateur" team from Lativia tied the NHL *super-stars*. Team Lativia went nuts after the game because they should have blown out. It made a big story because the professionals were almost beaten.
For the NHL professionals (or any other professional competing) this is not something they are dying to win. A lot of the time they are more worried about their National endorsements (think basketball star controversy) and/or they are worried about not going all out because they might get hurt and injure themselves and hurt their professional career. (Yes, not all think like this, but enough do which takes away some of the spirit of the games.)
Which would you rather see? A young amateur who goes all out and wins a gold after years of practice or a paid professional taking a week off from their competitive sport so they can try to pump up their professional career and get more shoe endorsements?