Where are all these jobs the article is talking about? I am about to leave the Army, and I have a degree in mathematics. While I have just started my job search(I still have more than 4 months before I'm available), I have not exactly had offers rolling in.
That's not really true. I've heard many people say that a college education today is like a high school education fifty years ago, but they are talking about levels of demand, not actual quality of eduction. The level of demand for a college education now is tremendously high, as opposed to fifty years ago when it was fairly easy to find labor requiring little formal eduction. Talking to people who were educated more than fifty years ago, I fear that the high schools then were generally less impressive than the ones we have now, which are less than they should be still.
That's a good point. We need to lower the poverty level. I find it ludicrous to consider people with their own car and color televisions(and quite likely cable to go with it) to be in poverty.
This definitely seems premature. Even if Mono is fully compliant, there are other things that make an operating system and many programs will rely on those other factors as well. Still, this should prove to be a step forward.
I have never been a SL user, but it seems to me that they failed to disclose material facts they had at their disposal about an item they were selling. If I bought something under those circumstances, I would at least be miffed and quite possibly considering legal recourse myself
SL also sets itself apart from most virtual worlds in that they themselves sell in game items instead of just selling accounts and access to the world itself. I don't think a claim like this would work in most other virtual worlds, but in a situation where people did not buy an account from the company and then bought other stuff from a third party, but where they actually bought the items devalued directly from the company I think they have a good case.
Incidentally, does anyone know why they decided to do this? Was there a huge outcry against the telehubs and a big demand for Point to point?
What we have from this is the indisputable fact that more *nix vulnerabilities were reported in the year than Windows vulnerability. This could mean a wide variety of things though...
For instance, this could just mean that the open source model is working as it was meant to and many eyes are finding more bugs. Windows could still have far more.
Also, consider that this does not go into detail on the severity of the codes. I am far more concerned about one serious vulnerability that would allow someone to readily get my sensitive information and control my pc than a dozen minor ones which may be exploitable only under uncommon circumstances or that allows only less severe exploits.
You have a point here to a degree. In my household, we have a huge demand for bandwidth because we split the connection. My wife and I are both avid users, and when we both have streaming audio going along with downloading and webbrowsing, peak demand can be extremely high(even if our average demand is not that insane). And that is with just the two of us. When our son is eventually old enough to make use of his own computer, we will have 3 users on the internet at one time, peak demand would be very high indeed even with what we currently do.
Another issue is that the more you have the more you can find a use for it. I am distinctly unimpressed with VOIP offerings at the moment when compared with my cell phone(my cell plan has free long distance, enough minutes to satisfy me, and I hardly ever call internationally). However, should VOIP improve or I begin to have a reason to use it, such as people I call regularly overseas, that would place a high demand on the bandwidth. Frequent use of streaming video would also greatly intensify the demands, and it is largely its present low quality that keeps me away from it. I think I can speak for most people when I say that as far as bandwidth goes, the more I have the more I will want.
This is a very good argument that Microsoft is no longer a monopoly, and it makes good points, but with that said, Microsoft is still close.
Microsoft still has the vast majority of the browser market, and I have been forced to change my website(even though it was completely standards compliant before) in order to make it rendered properly in explorer when it works perfectly in Mozilla, Firefox, and Opera. I have several times been forced to write the bulk of my document in OpenOffice.org and then move to a Windows system just to make the final edits so that it would appear the way I wanted it to when I sent it to someone who was locked into MicroSoft word.
It may be true that Microsoft no longer has a true Monopoly, but they still have more influence, more power, and more users than all the other companies/Open Source Groups combined.
You are largely correct here, however there are two things to point out. All services have assets in just about all areas. The army, navy, and marines all have aviation assets, the army has a decent amount of waterborne assets, etc. But with that said, each service has areas of primary responsibility. Of all the services, the Army is primarily responsible for land operations and the Air Force primarily responsible for aviation operations, and much historical political bickering has taken place over where the lines are drawn. By being the service with that phrase in its mission statement, the Air Force is at least temporarily claiming that it is the one primarily responsible
And yes, the NSA uses huge numbers of uniformed personnel, and the NSA director is always a military officer, so if the NSA got this charge much of the work would indeed be done by personnel in uniform. BUT it would be done by personnel in uniform working for a civilian agency that focuses on exactly this kind of thing historically rather than a military agency with cyberspace tacked on as almost an afterthought.
Also, you are correct that the air gap you refer to is morphing and beginning to fade, but it is far from gone and there are still and for the immediate future will be large differences in the level of trust that can be placed in the various networks. And I'm certain your deployed son is not using a commercial ISP, but I also doubt he is using one of the classified networks.
You may want to rethink much of this. First, the ability to respond in kind is not a bad thing to have, but it most certainly does not increase your ability to prevent incursions onto your network so that ability is completely irrelevant to protecting their networks and their decision making process.
Second, targetting and launch commands for even conventional weapons are not sent on the general internet. These networks are protected by a variety of means, but the key one being cryptography. The government already has a branch with the mission of maintaining government cryptography, the NSA...
I cannot speak to how a launch order is sent for nuclear weapons, but I doubt it is even on the secured military networks. I suspect(suspect only) that it would be more akin to a secure phone or secure radio message.
Next, the Air Force has no special claims to having a nuclear arsenal. The Navy maintains Nuclear Weapons, and it was relatively recently that the army gave up all of its nuclear arsenal. This is no special reason that the Air Force should have cyberspace as part of its mission.
In fact, historically it was the Navy that did the most and best radio interception and code breaking during WWII and WWI(remember much of this was before the NSA existed.) So if we are to go with history the Navy should have the mission. If we look forward it makes more sense to give this mission to the NSA or to an entirely new branch.
The author is patently wrong in stating that the trend towards overly sexualized women will go away. The fact is that the sex sells and as long as this is true, it will continue to appear in products meant to sell.
Gaming is likely to become more specialized though. Some games will continue to hypersexualize women, many to a degree of realism and explicitness that has not yet been realized, but others will move in the opposite direction and depict more realistic females. It will more fully fragments into market segments, as it has already begun to do now, and as movies did before it.
Neither the technical capabilities nor institutional culture of the Air Force really lend themselves to this mission. Given the mega-tonnage of stratigic nuclear weapons in the Air Force invetory, the entire world hopes you are wrong about that.
You are here comparing the ability to weild a sledgehammer(mega tonnage/nuclear weapons) with the ability to weild a scalpel(properly weilded cyberspace warfare/targeted hacking).
The original post was right, nothing in the (overt) culture or the (unclassified) technical capabilities of the Air Force lend itself to a cyberspace mission.
The NSA and CIA are much more likely agencies to properly weild such a mission especialy since at least at the moment cyberspace warfare is much closer to a combined intelligence/counterintelligence campaign than to warfare in any sort of a conventional format.
The problem with this is that I need to access many of my accounts from multiple computers so I can't use one password management program.
I use relatively strong passwords that I carefully memorize for my finances, and then the same password for everything else where having it compromised is a minor inconvenience such as for my slashdot account, etc.
How do you select which Myth's will be on the show? Is there a recurring source you often turn to? What are your criteria for the ones you will test and the ones you reject?
Why does it matter how you dress if you get the job done?
I do not expect my mechanic to be in a business suit or even care if he's well groomed if he gets my car working and well maintained quickly and at a decent price.
Focus on the results, not the suit.
The real question is how they are going about this. I took a class specifically on the conflict between evolution and certain religious viewpoints in college and I learned a lot during it. I learned a lot about evolution, the process of science, religion, and about critical analysis of thoughts regardless of source and authority.
If they take a careful analytical approach and use well thought out sources such a "Darwin's Black Box" by Behi, the students will benefit whatever the students end up believing.
Unfortunately, I doubt this will happen. My collge class was in college where higher expectations are placed on the students and was also a philsophy class. I fear that a segment in a high school science class will reach the same level.
My favorite boadgame for two players is definitely go. The rules are easy to learn, its fun even for beginners, but the strategy has enough depth to give the game beauty and lets you improve over a lifetime. It can also be played in a shortened version(smaller board) that goes fast if you are in a time crunch. And the boards are fairly cheap.
I also recommend Magic: The Gathering. It takes a bit more of a financial investment to get started, but its a lot of fun and is extremely versitile as it can be played by one-infinite players(though it starts bogging down and goes slowly with over 6) and has several variations.
Slashdot Mirror
Where are all these jobs the article is talking about? I am about to leave the Army, and I have a degree in mathematics. While I have just started my job search(I still have more than 4 months before I'm available), I have not exactly had offers rolling in.
That's not really true. I've heard many people say that a college education today is like a high school education fifty years ago, but they are talking about levels of demand, not actual quality of eduction. The level of demand for a college education now is tremendously high, as opposed to fifty years ago when it was fairly easy to find labor requiring little formal eduction. Talking to people who were educated more than fifty years ago, I fear that the high schools then were generally less impressive than the ones we have now, which are less than they should be still.
That's a good point. We need to lower the poverty level. I find it ludicrous to consider people with their own car and color televisions(and quite likely cable to go with it) to be in poverty.
This definitely seems premature. Even if Mono is fully compliant, there are other things that make an operating system and many programs will rely on those other factors as well. Still, this should prove to be a step forward.
I have never been a SL user, but it seems to me that they failed to disclose material facts they had at their disposal about an item they were selling. If I bought something under those circumstances, I would at least be miffed and quite possibly considering legal recourse myself
SL also sets itself apart from most virtual worlds in that they themselves sell in game items instead of just selling accounts and access to the world itself. I don't think a claim like this would work in most other virtual worlds, but in a situation where people did not buy an account from the company and then bought other stuff from a third party, but where they actually bought the items devalued directly from the company I think they have a good case.
Incidentally, does anyone know why they decided to do this? Was there a huge outcry against the telehubs and a big demand for Point to point?
What we have from this is the indisputable fact that more *nix vulnerabilities were reported in the year than Windows vulnerability. This could mean a wide variety of things though...
For instance, this could just mean that the open source model is working as it was meant to and many eyes are finding more bugs. Windows could still have far more.
Also, consider that this does not go into detail on the severity of the codes. I am far more concerned about one serious vulnerability that would allow someone to readily get my sensitive information and control my pc than a dozen minor ones which may be exploitable only under uncommon circumstances or that allows only less severe exploits.
You have a point here to a degree. In my household, we have a huge demand for bandwidth because we split the connection. My wife and I are both avid users, and when we both have streaming audio going along with downloading and webbrowsing, peak demand can be extremely high(even if our average demand is not that insane). And that is with just the two of us. When our son is eventually old enough to make use of his own computer, we will have 3 users on the internet at one time, peak demand would be very high indeed even with what we currently do.
Another issue is that the more you have the more you can find a use for it. I am distinctly unimpressed with VOIP offerings at the moment when compared with my cell phone(my cell plan has free long distance, enough minutes to satisfy me, and I hardly ever call internationally). However, should VOIP improve or I begin to have a reason to use it, such as people I call regularly overseas, that would place a high demand on the bandwidth. Frequent use of streaming video would also greatly intensify the demands, and it is largely its present low quality that keeps me away from it. I think I can speak for most people when I say that as far as bandwidth goes, the more I have the more I will want.
This is a very good argument that Microsoft is no longer a monopoly, and it makes good points, but with that said, Microsoft is still close.
Microsoft still has the vast majority of the browser market, and I have been forced to change my website(even though it was completely standards compliant before) in order to make it rendered properly in explorer when it works perfectly in Mozilla, Firefox, and Opera. I have several times been forced to write the bulk of my document in OpenOffice.org and then move to a Windows system just to make the final edits so that it would appear the way I wanted it to when I sent it to someone who was locked into MicroSoft word.
It may be true that Microsoft no longer has a true Monopoly, but they still have more influence, more power, and more users than all the other companies/Open Source Groups combined.
You are largely correct here, however there are two things to point out. All services have assets in just about all areas. The army, navy, and marines all have aviation assets, the army has a decent amount of waterborne assets, etc. But with that said, each service has areas of primary responsibility. Of all the services, the Army is primarily responsible for land operations and the Air Force primarily responsible for aviation operations, and much historical political bickering has taken place over where the lines are drawn. By being the service with that phrase in its mission statement, the Air Force is at least temporarily claiming that it is the one primarily responsible
And yes, the NSA uses huge numbers of uniformed personnel, and the NSA director is always a military officer, so if the NSA got this charge much of the work would indeed be done by personnel in uniform. BUT it would be done by personnel in uniform working for a civilian agency that focuses on exactly this kind of thing historically rather than a military agency with cyberspace tacked on as almost an afterthought.
Also, you are correct that the air gap you refer to is morphing and beginning to fade, but it is far from gone and there are still and for the immediate future will be large differences in the level of trust that can be placed in the various networks. And I'm certain your deployed son is not using a commercial ISP, but I also doubt he is using one of the classified networks.
You may want to rethink much of this. First, the ability to respond in kind is not a bad thing to have, but it most certainly does not increase your ability to prevent incursions onto your network so that ability is completely irrelevant to protecting their networks and their decision making process.
Second, targetting and launch commands for even conventional weapons are not sent on the general internet. These networks are protected by a variety of means, but the key one being cryptography. The government already has a branch with the mission of maintaining government cryptography, the NSA...
I cannot speak to how a launch order is sent for nuclear weapons, but I doubt it is even on the secured military networks. I suspect(suspect only) that it would be more akin to a secure phone or secure radio message.
Next, the Air Force has no special claims to having a nuclear arsenal. The Navy maintains Nuclear Weapons, and it was relatively recently that the army gave up all of its nuclear arsenal. This is no special reason that the Air Force should have cyberspace as part of its mission.
In fact, historically it was the Navy that did the most and best radio interception and code breaking during WWII and WWI(remember much of this was before the NSA existed.) So if we are to go with history the Navy should have the mission. If we look forward it makes more sense to give this mission to the NSA or to an entirely new branch.
The author is patently wrong in stating that the trend towards overly sexualized women will go away. The fact is that the sex sells and as long as this is true, it will continue to appear in products meant to sell.
Gaming is likely to become more specialized though. Some games will continue to hypersexualize women, many to a degree of realism and explicitness that has not yet been realized, but others will move in the opposite direction and depict more realistic females. It will more fully fragments into market segments, as it has already begun to do now, and as movies did before it.
You are here comparing the ability to weild a sledgehammer(mega tonnage/nuclear weapons) with the ability to weild a scalpel(properly weilded cyberspace warfare/targeted hacking).
The original post was right, nothing in the (overt) culture or the (unclassified) technical capabilities of the Air Force lend itself to a cyberspace mission.
The NSA and CIA are much more likely agencies to properly weild such a mission especialy since at least at the moment cyberspace warfare is much closer to a combined intelligence/counterintelligence campaign than to warfare in any sort of a conventional format.
The problem with this is that I need to access many of my accounts from multiple computers so I can't use one password management program. I use relatively strong passwords that I carefully memorize for my finances, and then the same password for everything else where having it compromised is a minor inconvenience such as for my slashdot account, etc.
How do you select which Myth's will be on the show? Is there a recurring source you often turn to? What are your criteria for the ones you will test and the ones you reject?
Why does it matter how you dress if you get the job done? I do not expect my mechanic to be in a business suit or even care if he's well groomed if he gets my car working and well maintained quickly and at a decent price. Focus on the results, not the suit.
The real question is how they are going about this. I took a class specifically on the conflict between evolution and certain religious viewpoints in college and I learned a lot during it. I learned a lot about evolution, the process of science, religion, and about critical analysis of thoughts regardless of source and authority.
If they take a careful analytical approach and use well thought out sources such a "Darwin's Black Box" by Behi, the students will benefit whatever the students end up believing.
Unfortunately, I doubt this will happen. My collge class was in college where higher expectations are placed on the students and was also a philsophy class. I fear that a segment in a high school science class will reach the same level.
My favorite boadgame for two players is definitely go. The rules are easy to learn, its fun even for beginners, but the strategy has enough depth to give the game beauty and lets you improve over a lifetime. It can also be played in a shortened version(smaller board) that goes fast if you are in a time crunch. And the boards are fairly cheap. I also recommend Magic: The Gathering. It takes a bit more of a financial investment to get started, but its a lot of fun and is extremely versitile as it can be played by one-infinite players(though it starts bogging down and goes slowly with over 6) and has several variations.