In addition to being a reminder that the people with a hard-on for 'biometrics' are either morons
There's a difference between 'uninformed' and 'moronic.' Part of the problem with IT security is that it's full of self-proclaimed experts who heap scorn on the uninformed instead of trying to educate them. You're not one of those, are you?
the police are perfectly within their rights to use highly efficient technology to catch those law breakers
While I agree that the police need appropriate tools and some latitude to do their jobs, I firmly believe their job is what the people (as in "we, the people") say it is. So whether speed cameras help their job depends on what their job is. My preference is for the police to concentrate on public safety, not revenue generation, so if the voters agree with me the police should only try to catch speeders to the extent necessary to keep the streets safe.
I think you could generalize that, that women in mainstream media are often portrayed as objects too (just not, usually, naked objects). You look at the cover of a men's magazine, and you see a scantily-clad woman. You look at the cover of a women's magazine, and you see a... scantily-clad woman. WTF? But I've also known women who enjoy being admired for their looks, under the right circumstances. As they said in the movie "This is Spinal Tap," "there's such a fine line between stupid and... clever!" I agree with you that the legislature is probably not in a good position to arbitrate that line.
Just from TFS, the headline of the proposal is "Eliminating Gender Stereotypes in the EU." I am not sure that is even a goal that is worthy of support. Are they trying to say that the gender roles that developed over the last 2500 years of European history are without value and need to be expunged from 21st century civilization?
I'm all in favor of correcting historical inequities like giving women equal pay and practical equality before the law. I also will go so far as to admit it's possible that women as a population might benefit from certain changes in workplace culture or other aspects of society.
What I don't accept is that everyone is supposed to pretend women are indistinguishable from men. I embrace my role as the bug-squasher and fix-it man, and my wife embraces her role as the cook. Social equality is not the same as mathematical equality. The language of "eliminating stereotypes" is worrisome for that reason. What we need is not a world without differences, but a world where the norms are inclusive of differences.
Actually, I'm trying to be helpful. There's a balance between having fun all day, the need to put food on the table, and the desire to achieve something of lasting value. If your job only advances one of those goals, then I feel sorry for *you*. I really think it's possible to get some of each from your job, if you have some self-knowledge and make thoughtful choices.
If your job is boring, find another one now. Otherwise you'll end up with years of experience in a job you hate. There is enough demand for competent programmers that you can find a non-boring job in a few weeks. I imagine that becomes harder once you've established a track record as a specialist in boredom.
If too many programming jobs seem boring, maybe programming isn't the career for you.
if he did what the government accuses him of doing, he deserves [a] medal, not jail time.
I would argue that he deserves a medal *and* jail time. Sometimes a citizen has a moral obligation to break a law, but to say the military should just overlook his law-breaking sounds an awful lot like "the end justifies the means." And that is the same argument the government is using to violate the Geneva convention and international law.
That's not the point. I do not believe it is appropriate to develop software without a revision-control system in place, but I've seen people do it. I do not, however, advocate a law to require people do basic obvious stuff like that.
There are several reasons, but the foremost is probably that ill-informed people (technical and non-technical) tend to mistake "going through the motions" for "doing it right." That is, checklists promote a cargo cult approach to security.
Compliance != good design, and indeed compliance is only a subset of good design when the requirements are perfect.
What I don't like is that it enables a nation to go to war without risking human casualties of their own.
This is not so different from the "limited air war" doctrine the US practiced for 20+ years between Vietnam and Desert Storm, or the drone war today. I don't like it, either.
Given that the "Do-not-track" option is a sad joke that will never protect anyone's privacy, I am going to go with "no." What we need instead is to restore the concept of "privacy" to something normal, routine, and backed by the force of law.
I also don't want political correctness, feminism or any of the other progressive mindsets in any of my businesses. Those people can hit the road -- I don't even want them as customers.
So your superior drive and ambition means you... routinely turn away customers? (Scare away, more likely.) You do not sound as smart as you think you are.
Depends on the scope of the petition. For things like reforming Social Security I am not expecting a policy decision to get made based on 100K signatures. For much narrower issues like this one, where the executive branch has authority to act without consulting Congress, I think we deserve an answer more like "The President has passed your petition along to the Librarian of Congress and directed him to reconsider this regulatory change. You can expect a press release explaining his final decision within 90 days."
Is anyone tracking how many of these petitions result in actual policy change? It seems most get a canned response explaining the Administration's position. I don't recall any responses that said, "that's a good idea, we'll go do it" or "we've added that to our legislative agenda."
Efforts to upgrade Raptors with two-way Link 16 or another, more widely compatible datalink so far have been stymied by technical and budgetary problems. In 2008, the Air Force tested a ground station at Langley that was able to receive data from F-22s then pass it back up to other fighters
All this means to me is that the technology of the data network and the doctrine for using that network is evolving faster than the aircraft themselves.
The F-22's design is over 20 years old. Think about what data networks looked like 20 years ago compared to today. Considering that the F-22 is an air superiority fighter and the current war is against an enemy who has no air force, I can see how the F-22 might not be at the top of the priority list for a comms refit.
For the sake of discussion, can anyone explain why a special-purpose graphing calculator is still useful? It would seem to me that a good smartphone app could replace a device like this, let alone a general-purpose laptop that can run Matlab, R, and Gnuplot.
Disclaimer: I have degrees in math and physics and never saw the use of a programmable calculator before. Generally I worked with equations and a pencil when I was a student and Matlab or C code once I got a job.
Yes, but there are laws in place to mitigate the impact of lead paint. I live in Massachusetts, where landlords are required to remove lead paint from a rental dwelling if the tenants have a child under age 6.
I have two things to say about this. One, it's a burdensome regulation that disinclines me to invest in rental properties in Massachusetts. Two, it probably works as a public-health measure.
Slashdot Mirror
There's a difference between 'uninformed' and 'moronic.' Part of the problem with IT security is that it's full of self-proclaimed experts who heap scorn on the uninformed instead of trying to educate them. You're not one of those, are you?
While I agree that the police need appropriate tools and some latitude to do their jobs, I firmly believe their job is what the people (as in "we, the people") say it is. So whether speed cameras help their job depends on what their job is. My preference is for the police to concentrate on public safety, not revenue generation, so if the voters agree with me the police should only try to catch speeders to the extent necessary to keep the streets safe.
I think you could generalize that, that women in mainstream media are often portrayed as objects too (just not, usually, naked objects). You look at the cover of a men's magazine, and you see a scantily-clad woman. You look at the cover of a women's magazine, and you see a ... scantily-clad woman. WTF? But I've also known women who enjoy being admired for their looks, under the right circumstances. As they said in the movie "This is Spinal Tap," "there's such a fine line between stupid and ... clever!" I agree with you that the legislature is probably not in a good position to arbitrate that line.
Just from TFS, the headline of the proposal is "Eliminating Gender Stereotypes in the EU." I am not sure that is even a goal that is worthy of support. Are they trying to say that the gender roles that developed over the last 2500 years of European history are without value and need to be expunged from 21st century civilization?
I'm all in favor of correcting historical inequities like giving women equal pay and practical equality before the law. I also will go so far as to admit it's possible that women as a population might benefit from certain changes in workplace culture or other aspects of society.
What I don't accept is that everyone is supposed to pretend women are indistinguishable from men. I embrace my role as the bug-squasher and fix-it man, and my wife embraces her role as the cook. Social equality is not the same as mathematical equality. The language of "eliminating stereotypes" is worrisome for that reason. What we need is not a world without differences, but a world where the norms are inclusive of differences.
Sort of like, well, every other tech company.
Many of the good old games are still for sale (cheap), without all the modern BS connection requirements, broken first releases, DRM, etc.
Actually, I'm trying to be helpful. There's a balance between having fun all day, the need to put food on the table, and the desire to achieve something of lasting value. If your job only advances one of those goals, then I feel sorry for *you*. I really think it's possible to get some of each from your job, if you have some self-knowledge and make thoughtful choices.
You live the life you make.
If your job is boring, find another one now. Otherwise you'll end up with years of experience in a job you hate. There is enough demand for competent programmers that you can find a non-boring job in a few weeks. I imagine that becomes harder once you've established a track record as a specialist in boredom.
If too many programming jobs seem boring, maybe programming isn't the career for you.
My moral view is less simple than some. For example, it's more nuanced than saying "fighting evil is a sufficient condition to be considered good."
I would argue that he deserves a medal *and* jail time. Sometimes a citizen has a moral obligation to break a law, but to say the military should just overlook his law-breaking sounds an awful lot like "the end justifies the means." And that is the same argument the government is using to violate the Geneva convention and international law.
Double standards are despicable.
That's not the point. I do not believe it is appropriate to develop software without a revision-control system in place, but I've seen people do it. I do not, however, advocate a law to require people do basic obvious stuff like that.
There are several reasons, but the foremost is probably that ill-informed people (technical and non-technical) tend to mistake "going through the motions" for "doing it right." That is, checklists promote a cargo cult approach to security.
Compliance != good design, and indeed compliance is only a subset of good design when the requirements are perfect.
Yeah, because what we really need in IT are more compliance checklists and more lawyers and more absolute rules that never get revisited or updated.
I'd be interested to know how you can separate words like "free" and "open" (as in "free" and "open source" software) from ideology.
This is not so different from the "limited air war" doctrine the US practiced for 20+ years between Vietnam and Desert Storm, or the drone war today. I don't like it, either.
Given that the "Do-not-track" option is a sad joke that will never protect anyone's privacy, I am going to go with "no." What we need instead is to restore the concept of "privacy" to something normal, routine, and backed by the force of law.
So your superior drive and ambition means you ... routinely turn away customers? (Scare away, more likely.) You do not sound as smart as you think you are.
All that is required to counteract this tactic is to anticipate it and be willing to fire bureaucrats. How does this sound:
Year 1: Budget cut is announced, director of agency embarks on campaign of collective punishment against the public. There is public outcry.
Year 2: Congress refuses to restore budget to pre-cut levels. Director continues his punitive war on productivity instead of cleaning house.
Year 3: President fires director for poor performance. New director appointed with mandate to improve service within existing budget constraints.
Year 4: If public outcry less than Year 1's level, continue business as usual. Else, go to Year 3.
I'm just saying it's possible to do it this way, not that it's likely.
Depends on the scope of the petition. For things like reforming Social Security I am not expecting a policy decision to get made based on 100K signatures. For much narrower issues like this one, where the executive branch has authority to act without consulting Congress, I think we deserve an answer more like "The President has passed your petition along to the Librarian of Congress and directed him to reconsider this regulatory change. You can expect a press release explaining his final decision within 90 days."
Is anyone tracking how many of these petitions result in actual policy change? It seems most get a canned response explaining the Administration's position. I don't recall any responses that said, "that's a good idea, we'll go do it" or "we've added that to our legislative agenda."
All this means to me is that the technology of the data network and the doctrine for using that network is evolving faster than the aircraft themselves.
The F-22's design is over 20 years old. Think about what data networks looked like 20 years ago compared to today. Considering that the F-22 is an air superiority fighter and the current war is against an enemy who has no air force, I can see how the F-22 might not be at the top of the priority list for a comms refit.
For the sake of discussion, can anyone explain why a special-purpose graphing calculator is still useful? It would seem to me that a good smartphone app could replace a device like this, let alone a general-purpose laptop that can run Matlab, R, and Gnuplot.
Disclaimer: I have degrees in math and physics and never saw the use of a programmable calculator before. Generally I worked with equations and a pencil when I was a student and Matlab or C code once I got a job.
Yes, but there are laws in place to mitigate the impact of lead paint. I live in Massachusetts, where landlords are required to remove lead paint from a rental dwelling if the tenants have a child under age 6.
I have two things to say about this. One, it's a burdensome regulation that disinclines me to invest in rental properties in Massachusetts. Two, it probably works as a public-health measure.
Perhaps they could respond by making games people will want to keep instead of reselling.
+1 Insightful, but minus several million for making me relive that horrible memory.