if there's an experience deficit from the previous tech to this one and there was budget for a second tech then the doctor might have a point. Or it's just garden variety melodrama you could hear at the coffee shop.
A task has to be well defined and proven in order to finish on time. Technicians are not graduate students. The technicians job is to facilitate a demand for resources, measuring efficiency, cost, time, feasibility, etc. The technicians job is not to assemble every possible part in every possible configuration. As a pc technician I wonder how it would have been if the three of them were working towards a common goal, they probably would have jammed the project out in like an hour. Other times the technician will need to work alone, basically the more reproducable something is the more a technician will tend to it. If the task is extrenuous it might be more of a favor than a job. That and the budget might be kind of crappy, technicians look terrible when they're underfunded/understaffed.
Oh, BS. It's perfectly reasonable to assume that a base windows install, if kept up to date, is about as secure from remote attacks as OpenBSD atleast once or twice a year. It's the first thing you do after a base install that really messes things up.
Given what you've said, you might argue that Windows Mandatory Integrity Control is fundamentally broken, but that's different, since most Mandatory Access Control configurations aren't going to be setup 100% anyways.
Basically, I'm assuming Google's ultimate response is that if you have 5-6 package managers running on your system it's still going to take extra effort to keep them from getting owned even if nobody turns off the updates.
This is why I disbelieve the assertion that you can win an argument and be wrong or misrepresent a product in order to sell it. You see you lost the argument on logical terms, you did not sell the item you sold - you sold the illusion of something else. These things are not success unless you are arguing for something you do not understand or falsely advertising something people really need.
"The reality is that nobody is capable of objective self-examination of their own thought processes."
This is a fairly absolute statement.
I contest, the reality is that the individual is the ONLY one capable of objective self-examination of their own thought processes.
Exactly, in fact by necessity you left your field for psychology, sociology, philosophy and apparently linguistics. I did not make the language distinction though I spent an hour or so this morning researching various vocabularies by profession/education/IQ level.
Interestingly, the numbers are 2,000 words for basic competency (HS), 6,000 for basic mastery (BS?, age 30, ???), and ~10-20,000 words for a doctorate level vocabulary.
"Had I known that the Germans would not succeed in developing an atomic bomb, I would have done nothing." - Albert Einstein
What you're really saying is that it doesn't matter that Einstein married his first cousin and contributed to the most destructive weapon of modern times, he was still a good man.
If more men were good fathers we would not need great men like Twain to speak the truth, or men like Einstein to build the bomb, the average man would speak the truth and any dispute settled long before the bomb was necessary.
They may have been great family men if they were not distracted with these huge injustices.
Damn, I haven't even watched the videos, but... A ten minute break every hour - lost privilege (how much?), 36 hour work week, paycheck shallow enough to *beg* for overtime, if it wasn't for the 5% percent attrition rate I'd guess this was fast food. Anyways, working PC support I was considering leaving and going INTO fast food just last week, as a manager I'd make the same and nobody ever comes into McDonald's asking for a flying cheeseburger and throws a goddamn fit over it. They throw fits, but they don't ask for flying fucking cheeseburgers.
Yeah, you should try 6 days, 12 hours, labor in warehousing or 40hrs at a legitimate old hillbilly saw mill.
8 out of 400,000 =.00002%
I don't know if that's high or not and I don't mean to be insensitive, but maybe they should have quit. I dunno.
"Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence" Hanlon's razor
It's a colossal Dilbertism regarding the communication barrier between engineers/technicians and management/everyone else.
Fast, cheap, accurate - pick two.
The fact that cleanup has been a complete and total clusterfuck is as plain as the nose on my face. An unprecedented highly technical emergency is guaranteed to just do it's thing while the engineers scramble to cram 5 yrs R&D into a month or two, while everyone else in the world wants to know wtf happened and who can we burn at the stake for this witchcraft.
It's purely fucking amazing that man has made it this far. I still think Isaac Asimov's foundation series is pure gold on this subject - man will fall by the weight of society if we are not very very careful. Executive summary is Cheap and Accurate. Fast and Cheap has been popular for ~30yrs now and the benefits have gone towards computers and business while forsaking just about everything else.
Under certain circumstances, urgent circumstances, desperate circumstances, profanity provides a relief denied even to prayer. - Mark Twain, a Biography
I really believe the point of the article is that flexibility is overrated. Not that it doesn't have it's place, but why do I have to explain to my mom that running themes in firefox is an engineering decision that decreases stability? That's an old example, so let's use that issue with McAfee the other day. There was a good deal of people here on slashdot wanting to blame their IT department for not testing the updates before pushing them. It's a decision where pushing updates early makes you less vulnerable to viruses and more vulnerable to software bugs and vice versa. This puts the IT department in a position of liability for failure on either side of the engineering decision. What really irks me is, that this isn't even the real issue, the ultimate question is whether or not the desktop machines were running hourly or daily updates. McAfee did exactly what was expected by fixing the update within a very short time frame, so any users that were running daily updates didn't notice, but running daily updates is a decision that *really* pisses the end user off because their computers tend to slow down a lot for larger updates. I prefer to run an AV that doesn't have this particular issue in their past, but I can't blame McAfee for all the flexibility in computing that has been made "useable" allowing joe sixpack to make engineering decisions he has no right to make.
An apt plumbing analogy at this point looks ridiculous. Let's say the average professional adult either flushed a dolls head down the toilet OR flushed a bag of mixed cement at least once a year. The cost of replacing all the pipes after about five years of abuse is of course high enough that thousands of cheap interim solutions have cropped up all over the place. McAfee made the analogous decision of flushing aggressive nanobots that just so happened to destroy the plumbing as well. At moments like this my general response to the user amounts to "tough shit". Not as a means of expressing superiority, elitism, or whatever, but in the sense that I should be held personally accountable for the insanity that is the bulk of the problems in IT.
On the other hand, the high degree of failure in IT leads to another frustration and anxiety inducing situation in that you cannot hold the incompetent accountable unless you work at a firm with lots of IT personel with which to make probabalistic comparisons (not even close to 100% accuracy anyways). The problem arises from the ethics of proving they are unfit for the job and the pragmaticality of accepting the fact that while they may be largely incompetent, you might not be able to replace them at that wage and then will be stuck with someone similarily competent at a lower degree of experience with your computing environment, which is, as gauranteed by flexibility and useability theories a beautiful and unique little piece of shit snowflake.
That's why I hate computers. Not because I hate complexity (read flexibility) or useability, but because I am accountable - politically - for this ubiquitous logical fallacy for which there is at times, no good solution or answer.
It's all patches, kludges, interim solutions, workarounds, bickering and the occasional lynching.
I hate the bickering and lynchings. The users hate the patches, kludges, interim solutions and workarounds.
Well that depends on how restrictive your firewall can be otherwise it is your AV. Maybe removing administrative access? That would be a point, but it's worse than an overbearing firewall. What's next, keeping your software up to date? Good luck with that! No, if you work somewhere where the users have decided they will use youtube and that's the way it is, you've got to have an AV.
Okay, I've thought about it a little bit more, I'd say one day - tops. Then if something goofy like this happens you can hit the kill switch, but you do not want to get caught dicking around with test cases when a virus hits. However, it's a catch 22 and the real answer is that they should not be putting you in this position.
No, this is just wrong. There is no reason whatsoever to test AV signatures before deploying them. The company is at fault. If you want to set up a server on the network, then do it because it saves bandwidth and deploys the updates QUICKER.
Your antivirus is your first line of defense, it is supposed to compensate for the other holes in your systems, it is not supposed to be so dangerous that it can't do it's job.
I'm gonna go with "yes", my opinion is neither objective nor intimate, but from the outside looking in, I think administrative issues look incredibly political. I'm certain this indicates a struggle to implement new methodologies or possible better thought methodologies while retaining previous talent. This is also, generally, a logical extension of a pragmatic philosophy where what works works. Contrast this attitude with say Theo de Raadt's, which is often considered to be unpragmatic with regards to certain functionalities and preferring a more deliberate methodology.
Slashdot Mirror
if there's an experience deficit from the previous tech to this one and there was budget for a second tech then the doctor might have a point. Or it's just garden variety melodrama you could hear at the coffee shop.
A task has to be well defined and proven in order to finish on time. Technicians are not graduate students. The technicians job is to facilitate a demand for resources, measuring efficiency, cost, time, feasibility, etc. The technicians job is not to assemble every possible part in every possible configuration. As a pc technician I wonder how it would have been if the three of them were working towards a common goal, they probably would have jammed the project out in like an hour. Other times the technician will need to work alone, basically the more reproducable something is the more a technician will tend to it. If the task is extrenuous it might be more of a favor than a job. That and the budget might be kind of crappy, technicians look terrible when they're underfunded/understaffed.
Oh, BS. It's perfectly reasonable to assume that a base windows install, if kept up to date, is about as secure from remote attacks as OpenBSD atleast once or twice a year. It's the first thing you do after a base install that really messes things up.
Given what you've said, you might argue that Windows Mandatory Integrity Control is fundamentally broken, but that's different, since most Mandatory Access Control configurations aren't going to be setup 100% anyways.
Basically, I'm assuming Google's ultimate response is that if you have 5-6 package managers running on your system it's still going to take extra effort to keep them from getting owned even if nobody turns off the updates.
Scientists find humans and chimps share 96% DNA.
Scientists find humans and bananas share 50% DNA.
reference Google
This is why I disbelieve the assertion that you can win an argument and be wrong or misrepresent a product in order to sell it. You see you lost the argument on logical terms, you did not sell the item you sold - you sold the illusion of something else. These things are not success unless you are arguing for something you do not understand or falsely advertising something people really need.
"The reality is that nobody is capable of objective self-examination of their own thought processes."
This is a fairly absolute statement.
I contest, the reality is that the individual is the ONLY one capable of objective self-examination of their own thought processes.
Exactly, in fact by necessity you left your field for psychology, sociology, philosophy and apparently linguistics. I did not make the language distinction though I spent an hour or so this morning researching various vocabularies by profession/education/IQ level.
Interestingly, the numbers are 2,000 words for basic competency (HS), 6,000 for basic mastery (BS?, age 30, ???), and ~10-20,000 words for a doctorate level vocabulary.
"Me? I know enough to know that I do not know ;)"
And yet you're clearly sitting here telling us how it is.
"Had I known that the Germans would not succeed in developing an atomic bomb, I would have done nothing." - Albert Einstein
What you're really saying is that it doesn't matter that Einstein married his first cousin and contributed to the most destructive weapon of modern times, he was still a good man.
If more men were good fathers we would not need great men like Twain to speak the truth, or men like Einstein to build the bomb, the average man would speak the truth and any dispute settled long before the bomb was necessary.
They may have been great family men if they were not distracted with these huge injustices.
Whaddya' want a fuckin' medal?
Nope, sorry, real heroes don't get medals. They're heroes because they pay the price that others cannot bear.
Damn, I haven't even watched the videos, but... A ten minute break every hour - lost privilege (how much?), 36 hour work week, paycheck shallow enough to *beg* for overtime, if it wasn't for the 5% percent attrition rate I'd guess this was fast food. Anyways, working PC support I was considering leaving and going INTO fast food just last week, as a manager I'd make the same and nobody ever comes into McDonald's asking for a flying cheeseburger and throws a goddamn fit over it. They throw fits, but they don't ask for flying fucking cheeseburgers.
Yeah, you should try 6 days, 12 hours, labor in warehousing or 40hrs at a legitimate old hillbilly saw mill.
8 out of 400,000 = .00002%
I don't know if that's high or not and I don't mean to be insensitive, but maybe they should have quit. I dunno.
"Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence"
Hanlon's razor
It's a colossal Dilbertism regarding the communication barrier between engineers/technicians and management/everyone else.
Fast, cheap, accurate - pick two.
The fact that cleanup has been a complete and total clusterfuck is as plain as the nose on my face. An unprecedented highly technical emergency is guaranteed to just do it's thing while the engineers scramble to cram 5 yrs R&D into a month or two, while everyone else in the world wants to know wtf happened and who can we burn at the stake for this witchcraft.
It's purely fucking amazing that man has made it this far. I still think Isaac Asimov's foundation series is pure gold on this subject - man will fall by the weight of society if we are not very very careful. Executive summary is Cheap and Accurate. Fast and Cheap has been popular for ~30yrs now and the benefits have gone towards computers and business while forsaking just about everything else.
Go smoke your grass somewhere else, ya damn grammar hippie freak!
Under certain circumstances, urgent circumstances, desperate circumstances, profanity provides a relief denied even to prayer.
- Mark Twain, a Biography
Yea, but what if the instructor's just a drippy cunt?
Why don't you just stop whining? Seriously, you sound like a little fuckin' kid - "he's touching me!".
STFU already.
I have sigs turned off.
I really believe the point of the article is that flexibility is overrated. Not that it doesn't have it's place, but why do I have to explain to my mom that running themes in firefox is an engineering decision that decreases stability? That's an old example, so let's use that issue with McAfee the other day. There was a good deal of people here on slashdot wanting to blame their IT department for not testing the updates before pushing them. It's a decision where pushing updates early makes you less vulnerable to viruses and more vulnerable to software bugs and vice versa. This puts the IT department in a position of liability for failure on either side of the engineering decision. What really irks me is, that this isn't even the real issue, the ultimate question is whether or not the desktop machines were running hourly or daily updates. McAfee did exactly what was expected by fixing the update within a very short time frame, so any users that were running daily updates didn't notice, but running daily updates is a decision that *really* pisses the end user off because their computers tend to slow down a lot for larger updates. I prefer to run an AV that doesn't have this particular issue in their past, but I can't blame McAfee for all the flexibility in computing that has been made "useable" allowing joe sixpack to make engineering decisions he has no right to make.
An apt plumbing analogy at this point looks ridiculous. Let's say the average professional adult either flushed a dolls head down the toilet OR flushed a bag of mixed cement at least once a year. The cost of replacing all the pipes after about five years of abuse is of course high enough that thousands of cheap interim solutions have cropped up all over the place. McAfee made the analogous decision of flushing aggressive nanobots that just so happened to destroy the plumbing as well. At moments like this my general response to the user amounts to "tough shit". Not as a means of expressing superiority, elitism, or whatever, but in the sense that I should be held personally accountable for the insanity that is the bulk of the problems in IT.
On the other hand, the high degree of failure in IT leads to another frustration and anxiety inducing situation in that you cannot hold the incompetent accountable unless you work at a firm with lots of IT personel with which to make probabalistic comparisons (not even close to 100% accuracy anyways). The problem arises from the ethics of proving they are unfit for the job and the pragmaticality of accepting the fact that while they may be largely incompetent, you might not be able to replace them at that wage and then will be stuck with someone similarily competent at a lower degree of experience with your computing environment, which is, as gauranteed by flexibility and useability theories a beautiful and unique little piece of shit snowflake.
That's why I hate computers. Not because I hate complexity (read flexibility) or useability, but because I am accountable - politically - for this ubiquitous logical fallacy for which there is at times, no good solution or answer.
It's all patches, kludges, interim solutions, workarounds, bickering and the occasional lynching.
I hate the bickering and lynchings. The users hate the patches, kludges, interim solutions and workarounds.
Why test? Just hold the updates for a day or so and if there's no news don't worry about it.
Well that depends on how restrictive your firewall can be otherwise it is your AV. Maybe removing administrative access? That would be a point, but it's worse than an overbearing firewall. What's next, keeping your software up to date? Good luck with that! No, if you work somewhere where the users have decided they will use youtube and that's the way it is, you've got to have an AV.
Okay, I've thought about it a little bit more, I'd say one day - tops. Then if something goofy like this happens you can hit the kill switch, but you do not want to get caught dicking around with test cases when a virus hits. However, it's a catch 22 and the real answer is that they should not be putting you in this position.
The shit list at this point is:
AVG
Bitdefender
McAfee
No, this is just wrong. There is no reason whatsoever to test AV signatures before deploying them. The company is at fault. If you want to set up a server on the network, then do it because it saves bandwidth and deploys the updates QUICKER.
Your antivirus is your first line of defense, it is supposed to compensate for the other holes in your systems, it is not supposed to be so dangerous that it can't do it's job.
regardless, I don't the the fuhrer is going to appreciate it. It's not the first time google has messed with him.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFEeOAQ2NUc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bY3gVhulbUM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0SDDkETCIQ
I'm gonna go with "yes", my opinion is neither objective nor intimate, but from the outside looking in, I think administrative issues look incredibly political. I'm certain this indicates a struggle to implement new methodologies or possible better thought methodologies while retaining previous talent. This is also, generally, a logical extension of a pragmatic philosophy where what works works. Contrast this attitude with say Theo de Raadt's, which is often considered to be unpragmatic with regards to certain functionalities and preferring a more deliberate methodology.
If you're still there, recommend C++ in the final course or so as a way for students to learn C++ and write modules for python.