If you have something worthwhile to protect, which is probably the reason why a change review board was established, you do not want add more time to that time window.
No, CABs often get implemented because someone is worried about the damage a borked patch/update could do and doesn't have confidence that it could be reliably fixed quickly. Most of the 'admin' in a change request is things like a process plan (which surely you already know if you're deploying an update to a critical live system) and a rollback process (which again, surely you should be considering before risking fubaring the system).
What I will say is that you should ensure that the CAB members are aware of the need to be able to handle emergency requests (meet, agree and deploy in hours) and should have some process to handle retrospective requests if a business critical update comes out and you can't wait for CAB approval. Normally the requirements for retrospective requests is that it's genuinely critical and that you send a completed request before the update. It might sound odd, but the idea is that they can use that to see if you had properly thought through the process and not just gone Rambo on it.
Any remotely well organised IT department will have processes for handling both emergency deployments and retrospective approval. I'm not going to be cheerleader for the concept of CAB but if you're going to make a case against it then at least make a reasonable one because hiding behind obvious nonsense like this will just make you look stupid and change averse to your employer.
I'd also like to suggest that people find it easier to be angry at losing than making an effort to win. Directly related somehow.
This. You are given the opportunity to vote for your elected representatives and leader. There is no threat of violence, discrimination etc for voting for the wrong choice and the results of the votes are honoured without, much, electoral corruption.
America is a democracy. It's pretty pathetic that people who are too apathetic to actually do anything to get candidates that they support elected simply wash their hands of it and claim the system isn't democratic. It's like someone saying that it's all the supermarkets fault they are fat because they position the food and you can't expect the shopper to take some responsibility for picking the right foods for them.
Because we, users in general, would rather have some bugs, than have to wait for years for features to be included. When I buy a car I want stability and safety more than I want cutting edge features. When I buy a laptop I expect it to include the latest USB/WIFI/BT specs, modern drivers, new software etc.
So I'm supposed to take seriously a critical submission about the French from someone ignorant enough not to know that la dolce vita is Italian? It doesn't even sound like it could be French, and there is even a French equivalent "la bonne vie" expression.
time they have been nationally mandated to spend on whatever the French call la dolce vita.
I've...played Freemium and Pay-to-win. I'm not interested in paying as much as I would for a full game to enjoy said benefits for one or two months. I also hate how it feels not being able to compete because I'm unwilling to pay a bunch of money. If I find the story or mechanics engaging, I'll check it out...but I leave my wallet at home.
To be fair, the have to spend a lot to compete model wasn't invented by p2w games. MMOs and plenty of other games often have a model that requires you to spend ungodly amounts of time grinding for equipment, upgrades, skills etc if you want to play at the top levels and have a chance.
Personally I don't see the difference between a game requiring you to spend $20 to have the best stuff and a game requiring you to spend 400 hours to have the best stuff. In both cases you're leaving a large chunk of players unable to do it.
We've all either encountered or heard about a game company using shady business practices to squeeze every cent from their users through in-app purchases (a.k.a. microtransations, a.k.a. cash shops), or a simple pay-to-win format. But these stories don't represent all games — by a long shot. It's something endemic to shady developers and publishers, not the business model.
It is something fundamentally wrong with the business model. Name a recent popular f2p game where the pay element isn't an issue?
f2p is fundamentally flawed because of how people use it. The majority of people who download a f2p game are parasites with no intention of paying, the game company doesn't want these users to stay longer than it takes for them to casually enjoy it, maybe recommend it and possibly change into one of the minority of paying customers. Because most customers will never pay, the few that will have to be taken to the cleaners to make enough revenue to cover for this. For those of us who are happy to spend a moderate amount on games this is a shitty model because instead of paying $5 upfront for a good experience, we need to pay tens of dollars to get an experience that is cheapened by the purchase mechanic.
When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I became an atheist.
As opposed to: When I was a child, the bible talked for me, the bible thought for me, the bible reasoned for me. When I became a man, I remained indoctrinated.
Because there isn't some magically right or wrong answer. Clearly there's something wrong with contacting them if we don't do a better job of controlling whatever disease and/or other factors is wiping them out though.
Either you don't understand Slashdot's native language, or you don't understand English. In any case, the Enlish "nor" is short for "neither", which is true as long as both inputs are false, exactly like a NOR gate.
Odd how you'd accuse him of not understanding English when you yourself then misdefine the same word. As someone who is still trying to break the habit of using it in conversation and baffling southerners I can assure you that it isn't limited to use as a short form of neither, and nor should it be.
Pretty much my opinion. I've been using Win 8 on my home pc since release and to be honest the minor irritations would seem irrelevant if Win 7 hadn't been a very well designed OS. If I'd gone straight from XP/Vista to Win 8 then I'd have seen it as a definite improvement.
Possibly true (certainly true in all examples I can think of), however inconvenience doesn't automatically mean security. An informed user can likely run a secure Win7/8 enviroment with considerably less inconvenience than running an equally secure Win XP enviroment especially once MS drop security updates.
Not turning the box on would protect 100% of users but that doesn't make it a viable solution. He thinks his setup is preferable even without MS updates, in fact he doesn't want windows updates. I don't agree with him but it's irrelevant because his situation isn't one that supports ongoing support from MS or upgrading because of the lack of it.
Then buy them and sell them back when you're done.
If you want the convenience of not putting a lot of money down up front and not having to find someone to buy them off you later
Why, when I'm perfectly happy with the current arrangement of lots of other people owning things and offering them to me on a rental basis. I don't want to have to buy a house with all the paperwork, expenses and headaches that come with it and then sell it again if I only want to be in an area for a year or so.
Property in SF and many other cities costs a lot because more people want to live there than the city has capacity for. Banning renting isn't going to magically fix that, rich people will be able to buy and poor people won't. So in your example the poor sod who is spending all their money on rent now would be stuck living outside the city in somewhere they could afford the deposit and mortgage on.
Why assume that tax based on income, profit or sales are completely rational and to be expected but taxes on 'hotels' are somehow weird? Tax is going to be raised. A lot of places tax hotels as a way to get money off tourists and other visitors rather than residents. Criminalising short term rentals is a response to the fact that people would use 'short term rentals' as a get around to avoid the taxes otherwise.
There are far, far, better things to be disturbed about than this.
One can argue that an OS is infrastructure, and not a product. Like water pipes and electrical wires, other services depend on them.
One could argue the same thing about Lorries and mobile phones... that doesn't automatically mean that MS should be forced to support a product, or release source code, when they don't want to. If the government takes a view that OS are 'infrastructure' and thus source must be released, support must continue for x years etc then it should apply to all providers and should only apply to products they release after that is decided.
Not in my last 6 flights they haven't, at least not without trying to be incredibly covert about it which I seriously doubt. All these flights were within Europe or SE Asia, I don't know if head counts are more common in other regions.
The reality is people are really stupid when they go outside their field of expertise.
No. People are uninformed about things outside their expertise. They are only stupid when they try and comment on other fields. I'm not stupid when it comes to combustion engines. If someone asked me if a V8 or V10 were better I'd say I had no clue, stupid would be going V10 on the basis that 10 sounds better and I heard of a good V10 car once. In a way it's our own fault that our representatives express uninformed opinions: the politician who regularily says "I don't know" would be judged as ignorant or stupid.
This is a fair point. Blackberry's were not the first smartphones, there was an extensive period of clunky win phone devices etc before this that were much harder to use and less convenient. I'm not sure that smart watches will follow the same path but it's pointless using smartphones as evidence they will fail.
I don't wear a watch and as I wear glasses I'd much prefer an enhanced pair of glasses over an additional wearable device. A watch doesn't provide a good input interface and it doesn't provide that much in terms of output to make wearing an additional device worthwhile over pulling a phone out of your pocket.
Fad doesn't mean that it ceases to exist entirely after the fad ends it means something that goes through a generally short period of intent interest before largely disappearing. That is certainly the case with the Wii which had huge sales initially, and was seen as the future of console gaming, but within half a console generation that view had evaporated.
If the atheist was supporting efforts to outlaw religion, I, an atheist as well, would be supporting his removal.
You're welcome to, but it really isn't a very helpful analogy. Eich didn't support outlawing homosexuality. He was doing something more equivalent of opposing state recognition of religion, which certainly isn't something I would consider it reasonable for people to hound him out of his job for.
Slashdot Mirror
No, CABs often get implemented because someone is worried about the damage a borked patch/update could do and doesn't have confidence that it could be reliably fixed quickly. Most of the 'admin' in a change request is things like a process plan (which surely you already know if you're deploying an update to a critical live system) and a rollback process (which again, surely you should be considering before risking fubaring the system).
What I will say is that you should ensure that the CAB members are aware of the need to be able to handle emergency requests (meet, agree and deploy in hours) and should have some process to handle retrospective requests if a business critical update comes out and you can't wait for CAB approval. Normally the requirements for retrospective requests is that it's genuinely critical and that you send a completed request before the update. It might sound odd, but the idea is that they can use that to see if you had properly thought through the process and not just gone Rambo on it.
Any remotely well organised IT department will have processes for handling both emergency deployments and retrospective approval. I'm not going to be cheerleader for the concept of CAB but if you're going to make a case against it then at least make a reasonable one because hiding behind obvious nonsense like this will just make you look stupid and change averse to your employer.
This. You are given the opportunity to vote for your elected representatives and leader. There is no threat of violence, discrimination etc for voting for the wrong choice and the results of the votes are honoured without, much, electoral corruption.
America is a democracy. It's pretty pathetic that people who are too apathetic to actually do anything to get candidates that they support elected simply wash their hands of it and claim the system isn't democratic. It's like someone saying that it's all the supermarkets fault they are fat because they position the food and you can't expect the shopper to take some responsibility for picking the right foods for them.
Because we, users in general, would rather have some bugs, than have to wait for years for features to be included. When I buy a car I want stability and safety more than I want cutting edge features. When I buy a laptop I expect it to include the latest USB/WIFI/BT specs, modern drivers, new software etc.
To be fair, the have to spend a lot to compete model wasn't invented by p2w games. MMOs and plenty of other games often have a model that requires you to spend ungodly amounts of time grinding for equipment, upgrades, skills etc if you want to play at the top levels and have a chance.
Personally I don't see the difference between a game requiring you to spend $20 to have the best stuff and a game requiring you to spend 400 hours to have the best stuff. In both cases you're leaving a large chunk of players unable to do it.
It is something fundamentally wrong with the business model. Name a recent popular f2p game where the pay element isn't an issue?
f2p is fundamentally flawed because of how people use it. The majority of people who download a f2p game are parasites with no intention of paying, the game company doesn't want these users to stay longer than it takes for them to casually enjoy it, maybe recommend it and possibly change into one of the minority of paying customers. Because most customers will never pay, the few that will have to be taken to the cleaners to make enough revenue to cover for this. For those of us who are happy to spend a moderate amount on games this is a shitty model because instead of paying $5 upfront for a good experience, we need to pay tens of dollars to get an experience that is cheapened by the purchase mechanic.
Except he said we orbit the sun, which makes the point we rotate around irrelevant to his statement.
As opposed to: When I was a child, the bible talked for me, the bible thought for me, the bible reasoned for me. When I became a man, I remained indoctrinated.
Because there isn't some magically right or wrong answer. Clearly there's something wrong with contacting them if we don't do a better job of controlling whatever disease and/or other factors is wiping them out though.
Odd how you'd accuse him of not understanding English when you yourself then misdefine the same word. As someone who is still trying to break the habit of using it in conversation and baffling southerners I can assure you that it isn't limited to use as a short form of neither, and nor should it be.
Pretty much my opinion. I've been using Win 8 on my home pc since release and to be honest the minor irritations would seem irrelevant if Win 7 hadn't been a very well designed OS. If I'd gone straight from XP/Vista to Win 8 then I'd have seen it as a definite improvement.
Possibly true (certainly true in all examples I can think of), however inconvenience doesn't automatically mean security. An informed user can likely run a secure Win7/8 enviroment with considerably less inconvenience than running an equally secure Win XP enviroment especially once MS drop security updates.
Not turning the box on would protect 100% of users but that doesn't make it a viable solution. He thinks his setup is preferable even without MS updates, in fact he doesn't want windows updates. I don't agree with him but it's irrelevant because his situation isn't one that supports ongoing support from MS or upgrading because of the lack of it.
I do not think it means, what you think it means.
No problem. You buy a pickup from the store down the road, load the Kayak in the back and then once your done you sell the vehicle as well.
Why, when I'm perfectly happy with the current arrangement of lots of other people owning things and offering them to me on a rental basis. I don't want to have to buy a house with all the paperwork, expenses and headaches that come with it and then sell it again if I only want to be in an area for a year or so.
Property in SF and many other cities costs a lot because more people want to live there than the city has capacity for. Banning renting isn't going to magically fix that, rich people will be able to buy and poor people won't. So in your example the poor sod who is spending all their money on rent now would be stuck living outside the city in somewhere they could afford the deposit and mortgage on.
Why assume that tax based on income, profit or sales are completely rational and to be expected but taxes on 'hotels' are somehow weird? Tax is going to be raised. A lot of places tax hotels as a way to get money off tourists and other visitors rather than residents. Criminalising short term rentals is a response to the fact that people would use 'short term rentals' as a get around to avoid the taxes otherwise.
There are far, far, better things to be disturbed about than this.
One could argue the same thing about Lorries and mobile phones... that doesn't automatically mean that MS should be forced to support a product, or release source code, when they don't want to. If the government takes a view that OS are 'infrastructure' and thus source must be released, support must continue for x years etc then it should apply to all providers and should only apply to products they release after that is decided.
Not in my last 6 flights they haven't, at least not without trying to be incredibly covert about it which I seriously doubt. All these flights were within Europe or SE Asia, I don't know if head counts are more common in other regions.
No. People are uninformed about things outside their expertise. They are only stupid when they try and comment on other fields. I'm not stupid when it comes to combustion engines. If someone asked me if a V8 or V10 were better I'd say I had no clue, stupid would be going V10 on the basis that 10 sounds better and I heard of a good V10 car once. In a way it's our own fault that our representatives express uninformed opinions: the politician who regularily says "I don't know" would be judged as ignorant or stupid.
This is a fair point. Blackberry's were not the first smartphones, there was an extensive period of clunky win phone devices etc before this that were much harder to use and less convenient. I'm not sure that smart watches will follow the same path but it's pointless using smartphones as evidence they will fail.
I don't wear a watch and as I wear glasses I'd much prefer an enhanced pair of glasses over an additional wearable device. A watch doesn't provide a good input interface and it doesn't provide that much in terms of output to make wearing an additional device worthwhile over pulling a phone out of your pocket.
Fad doesn't mean that it ceases to exist entirely after the fad ends it means something that goes through a generally short period of intent interest before largely disappearing. That is certainly the case with the Wii which had huge sales initially, and was seen as the future of console gaming, but within half a console generation that view had evaporated.
You're welcome to, but it really isn't a very helpful analogy. Eich didn't support outlawing homosexuality. He was doing something more equivalent of opposing state recognition of religion, which certainly isn't something I would consider it reasonable for people to hound him out of his job for.