Yeah, but at Harvard Business School, I think they call that a "Free Market Economy." He must have been doing some advanced reading before dropping out to pursue a rewarding career as a douche bag.
I'm sure there would be DNS. It does a grand bit more than many people realize. Additionally, I suspect that in your scenario, there would be a dramatic curbing of malware and spam, especially once users began to get super pissed off about getting bandwidth usage charges for having to download the messages. Anything that makes the spam stop is acceptable.
That's probably the same as saying 66% of all Windows users are on older hardware which was already "good enough." They probably won't get Windows 7 until they buy a new computer. I have Win 7 x64 Pro in a VMWare image and it works relatively well in there, but I had to tweak the settings for the container, and if I run it with less than 2GB of memory allocated, it starts to get pissy. Maybe its different when running it on the physical machine, but I'm somewhat skeptical, and if I were running on an older PC, I'd probably skip the software upgrade and wait for a hardware upgrade.
CYMK is required for pre-press work for print. If you've never done graphics for print publications before (i have, for some fairly substantial runs), then you probably don't know that CYMK is that important. I had fixed a picture in Gimp one time because PS was pissing me off, and the print house sent back the proofs saying they couldn't use that image source. I had to transform from RGB to CYMK in Photoshop and re-send it. That's when I learned my lesson.
Saying that "real professionals" don't need CYMK is like saying that "real professionals" don't need to buy Cisco or Juniper hardware because then can just install OpenBGP and OSPF on a 1U super micro with a couple of GigE's and a serial card.
Each sides is trying to "frame the debate," but unlike other issues where people frame the debate, such as abortion, guns, immigration, etc, there isn't enough common knowledge to allow people in the middle to have an independent basis for deciding who's frame is more like a bucket of bullshit. This is in contrast to something like guns, where at least there is the second amendment, which while subject to interpretation, is only one sentence long, unlike most of the laws that form the "rational" basis for net neutrality.
So, yeah, each extreme is talking past each other, but they know it and are doing it on purpose. Unfortunately, the people in the middle can't really tell. Or maybe they can and just don't care.
I work for a much smaller company than Raytheon, and didn't have to do service first to get my gig. My comment isn't about the job, its about the fact that a lot of the bigger companies want the drop-in people that they don't have to spend the copious amounts of money to get cleared, while having them on the pay roll for a few months not doing anything because they aren't allowed to. It's an expensive and involved process, and a lot of the times someone who is "good enough" and can start working NOW is going to be the better choice over someone who might be brilliant, but who has to be vetted over an extended period of time, first.
Its not like they don't already have a pool of qualified staff. They just have to poach from places such as NORAD, DIA, DSA, etc.
Every year the NSA sponsors computer security war games between the service academies, where they have to defend against NSA hackers, and the school to hold out the longest wins the trophy. Non-officers get training if their MOS requires it.
It just seems to be needing to find enlisted personnel who can be re-purposed to the new command without disrupting current operations too much, since apparently they already had officers who were able to be put into place.
See, the military is supposed to have trained these people already. And vetted them for TS/SCI clearances so that Raytheon doesn't have to pay for that either. Then, upon honorable discharge, they can do the same job for 1.5x the pay, but get to wear a poloshirt instead of digis and think that they're having fun. If that doesn't describe you, then you're too expensive to invest in, will take too long to process, and they don't want to bother,
I don't want fart apps, but seriously, if the comments quoted in the summary are accurate and in context (oh, wait, forgot where I was...), then I can be sure that I have no use for this product. I had a BlackBerry Storm for about a year, but the user experience was so terrible, that I chunked it and gave up on smart phones all together, switching to a Motorola Barrage, which has so far been impervious to my poor treatment of it.
I have no interest in seeing adds, getting premium content, or adding "value" to my phone experience, and I don't want to do it on a "tablet" that's smaller than a tablet but too large to be a phone, either. Sorry, not really needed. This sort of attitude from all the major players in smart phones is a large part of why I just won't go back to one until they no longer make phone-shapped, call-making cell phones.
Maybe you don't have a favorite library. Maybe you have an idea for a new library, but because you've only ever used other people's libraries, you're not quite up to speed on how to do things the "pure" way. The people who write the libraries had to start somewhere, and its often times at the bottom.
So... its unconstitutional for the Chief Executive to issue an Executive Order to Executive Branch agencies, telling them how he thinks they should act, within their Legislatively mandated authority to craft details of policy implementation within the scope of the legislation in question?
Just because its a bitch move doesn't make it unconstitutional.
Clinton issued an executive order placing cryptographic software under the dominion of the Commerce Department with regards to export, and the Commerce Department simplified export rules to make things easier. However, they can always take it back, its not law, just policy.
Meanwhile, in Reality Land... Microsoft continues to hold a dominate position in a mature market, targeting business customers Apple doesn't seem to care about. They have a market cap over $211bn and have started paying out dividends. They're in IBM territory now, but the media loves underdogs and sexy startups, and one thing Microsoft has never been is sexy, even when they were a startup. However, I don't really think they care. Not that I really have terribly much use for any of their products, and my personal situation is in no way tied to their fortunes. But to say that only getting 3% of the media coverage is going to hurt them is just kind of stupid. Its almost like Boeing running commercials -- anyone in a position to be purchasing ANYTHING from Boeing isn't going to make that decision off of a 30-second ad. For some companies, media interest is irrelevant, because they're entrenched in their market.
Probably o/t, but you just reminded me of 'Masters of War' by Bob Dylan:
Come you masters of war You that build the big guns You that build the death planes You that build all the bombs You that hide behind walls You that hide behind desks I just want you to know I can see through your masks.
You that never done nothin' But build to destroy You play with my world Like it's your little toy You put a gun in my hand And you hide from my eyes And you turn and run farther When the fast bullets fly.
Like Judas of old You lie and deceive A world war can be won You want me to believe But I see through your eyes And I see through your brain Like I see through the water That runs down my drain.
You fasten all the triggers For the others to fire Then you set back and watch When the death count gets higher You hide in your mansion' As young people's blood Flows out of their bodies And is buried in the mud.
You've thrown the worst fear That can ever be hurled Fear to bring children Into the world For threatening my baby Unborn and unnamed You ain't worth the blood That runs in your veins.
How much do I know To talk out of turn You might say that I'm young You might say I'm unlearned But there's one thing I know Though I'm younger than you That even Jesus would never Forgive what you do.
Let me ask you one question Is your money that good Will it buy you forgiveness Do you think that it could I think you will find When your death takes its toll All the money you made Will never buy back your soul.
And I hope that you die And your death'll come soon I will follow your casket In the pale afternoon And I'll watch while you're lowered Down to your deathbed And I'll stand over your grave 'Til I'm sure that you're dead.
paywall? I'm not sure that means what you think it means. NYTimes.com registration is free. With adblocker and free registration, its one of the most useful sites on the web. It's an annoying extra step you only have to do once, but it doesn't cost any money.
The real reason probably has a lot more to do with the fact that we're even sitting around here on a Saturday afternoon questioning the decision. Geeks tend to think they're smarter than everyone else (just because its usually true, doesn't mean it always is), tend to question authority, and hate to be told what to do. If you give a geek a little bit of authority, they tend to get extremely dictatorial over their small little domain.
How likely is it that "true geeks" would really be able to fit into a military command structure and obey the orders of officers and the President without a million back-talking questions and suggestions about how things "should" be done?
Training people who learn the technical aspects of the job is probably easier than training people who already know (or think they know, more likely) about network security to just shut up, do what their told, and wear the clothes they're supposed to wear. There are plenty of smart people who didn't spend all their childhood fucking around with computers who are more than capable of being taught how to do what we do, and who also haven't yet developed mini god complexes or root syndrome.
I was medically disqualified from service (allegedly i have some mild bit of asthma that makes me barely fail a PFT), and spent my childhood being a geek. Not going to say I like being told what to do or that I don't have root syndrome, but that's why I'm in the group of people not suited to that sort of gig, and that's fine because I don't really want it.
The greatest American general? Would that be Patton? Or Lee? Or the only man ever to get higher marks at West Point than Lee, Douglas MacArthur? Pershing was no slouch either. Eisenhower had actually been subordinate to both Pershing and MacArthur earlier in his career, and only a lucky break getting assigned to the General Staff in D.C. that allowed him some paper-pusher promotions got him to the head of the queue. He barely even had any combat experience.
The war in Germany was limited because the Americans and British, while not pro-Nazi (except the people where were), weren't really anti-German. There are too many Germans in the US and Britain for that to happen, and the current set of British Royals are German. My grandfather on my mother's side fought in Europe during WWII, but before he shipped out they trained him for bayonet on dolls with Japanese features.
The American people at that time probably would have accepted extremely high losses fighting the Japanese and wouldn't take anything less than unconditional surrender. If they hadn't given up after the two nukes, no one here would probably ever have heard the phrase "made in Japan."
But what the OP was referring two was more along the lines of the fact that between the US, UK and Canada, we suffered over 10,000 casualties, with well over 2000 of those being actual battlefield deaths, just on D-DAY. Just D-DAY, not even the whole Normandy campaign. We have had a bit of 4,000 dead in all 7 years of the Iraq war, while we lost over 418,000 in WWII, or about 0.32% of our population at the start of the war.
I'm not trying to diminish the feeling of loss I'm sure the families of the 4,000+ US soldiers who have died in Iraq must feel. However, the fact that in 7 years we've lost about twice the number of soldiers we lost trying to get ashore in France on 6 June, 1944, speaks volumes about what "limited" war might actually be.
Slashdot Mirror
I'd have voted for GCC instead, but whatever.
Yeah, but at Harvard Business School, I think they call that a "Free Market Economy." He must have been doing some advanced reading before dropping out to pursue a rewarding career as a douche bag.
I'm sure there would be DNS. It does a grand bit more than many people realize. Additionally, I suspect that in your scenario, there would be a dramatic curbing of malware and spam, especially once users began to get super pissed off about getting bandwidth usage charges for having to download the messages. Anything that makes the spam stop is acceptable.
That's probably the same as saying 66% of all Windows users are on older hardware which was already "good enough." They probably won't get Windows 7 until they buy a new computer. I have Win 7 x64 Pro in a VMWare image and it works relatively well in there, but I had to tweak the settings for the container, and if I run it with less than 2GB of memory allocated, it starts to get pissy. Maybe its different when running it on the physical machine, but I'm somewhat skeptical, and if I were running on an older PC, I'd probably skip the software upgrade and wait for a hardware upgrade.
CYMK is required for pre-press work for print. If you've never done graphics for print publications before (i have, for some fairly substantial runs), then you probably don't know that CYMK is that important. I had fixed a picture in Gimp one time because PS was pissing me off, and the print house sent back the proofs saying they couldn't use that image source. I had to transform from RGB to CYMK in Photoshop and re-send it. That's when I learned my lesson.
Saying that "real professionals" don't need CYMK is like saying that "real professionals" don't need to buy Cisco or Juniper hardware because then can just install OpenBGP and OSPF on a 1U super micro with a couple of GigE's and a serial card.
Each sides is trying to "frame the debate," but unlike other issues where people frame the debate, such as abortion, guns, immigration, etc, there isn't enough common knowledge to allow people in the middle to have an independent basis for deciding who's frame is more like a bucket of bullshit. This is in contrast to something like guns, where at least there is the second amendment, which while subject to interpretation, is only one sentence long, unlike most of the laws that form the "rational" basis for net neutrality.
So, yeah, each extreme is talking past each other, but they know it and are doing it on purpose. Unfortunately, the people in the middle can't really tell. Or maybe they can and just don't care.
I work for a much smaller company than Raytheon, and didn't have to do service first to get my gig. My comment isn't about the job, its about the fact that a lot of the bigger companies want the drop-in people that they don't have to spend the copious amounts of money to get cleared, while having them on the pay roll for a few months not doing anything because they aren't allowed to. It's an expensive and involved process, and a lot of the times someone who is "good enough" and can start working NOW is going to be the better choice over someone who might be brilliant, but who has to be vetted over an extended period of time, first.
You, sir, are the one who seem more ignorant.
Its not like they don't already have a pool of qualified staff. They just have to poach from places such as NORAD, DIA, DSA, etc.
Every year the NSA sponsors computer security war games between the service academies, where they have to defend against NSA hackers, and the school to hold out the longest wins the trophy. Non-officers get training if their MOS requires it.
It just seems to be needing to find enlisted personnel who can be re-purposed to the new command without disrupting current operations too much, since apparently they already had officers who were able to be put into place.
Yeah, but if they're against Facebook, they can't be all bad. Sort of like the Mafia vs Castro, right?
See, the military is supposed to have trained these people already. And vetted them for TS/SCI clearances so that Raytheon doesn't have to pay for that either. Then, upon honorable discharge, they can do the same job for 1.5x the pay, but get to wear a poloshirt instead of digis and think that they're having fun. If that doesn't describe you, then you're too expensive to invest in, will take too long to process, and they don't want to bother,
I don't want fart apps, but seriously, if the comments quoted in the summary are accurate and in context (oh, wait, forgot where I was...), then I can be sure that I have no use for this product. I had a BlackBerry Storm for about a year, but the user experience was so terrible, that I chunked it and gave up on smart phones all together, switching to a Motorola Barrage, which has so far been impervious to my poor treatment of it.
I have no interest in seeing adds, getting premium content, or adding "value" to my phone experience, and I don't want to do it on a "tablet" that's smaller than a tablet but too large to be a phone, either. Sorry, not really needed. This sort of attitude from all the major players in smart phones is a large part of why I just won't go back to one until they no longer make phone-shapped, call-making cell phones.
Maybe you don't have a favorite library. Maybe you have an idea for a new library, but because you've only ever used other people's libraries, you're not quite up to speed on how to do things the "pure" way. The people who write the libraries had to start somewhere, and its often times at the bottom.
So... its unconstitutional for the Chief Executive to issue an Executive Order to Executive Branch agencies, telling them how he thinks they should act, within their Legislatively mandated authority to craft details of policy implementation within the scope of the legislation in question?
Just because its a bitch move doesn't make it unconstitutional.
Clinton issued an executive order placing cryptographic software under the dominion of the Commerce Department with regards to export, and the Commerce Department simplified export rules to make things easier. However, they can always take it back, its not law, just policy.
Well, the Einstein one maybe not, but RIAA aiding opressive regiemes seems to be the general consensus around here.
Jackson was the last good President. This country's been all down hill ever since.
Meanwhile, in Reality Land... Microsoft continues to hold a dominate position in a mature market, targeting business customers Apple doesn't seem to care about. They have a market cap over $211bn and have started paying out dividends. They're in IBM territory now, but the media loves underdogs and sexy startups, and one thing Microsoft has never been is sexy, even when they were a startup. However, I don't really think they care. Not that I really have terribly much use for any of their products, and my personal situation is in no way tied to their fortunes. But to say that only getting 3% of the media coverage is going to hurt them is just kind of stupid. Its almost like Boeing running commercials -- anyone in a position to be purchasing ANYTHING from Boeing isn't going to make that decision off of a 30-second ad. For some companies, media interest is irrelevant, because they're entrenched in their market.
You just got woosh-served.
Probably o/t, but you just reminded me of 'Masters of War' by Bob Dylan:
Come you masters of war
You that build the big guns
You that build the death planes
You that build all the bombs
You that hide behind walls
You that hide behind desks
I just want you to know
I can see through your masks.
You that never done nothin'
But build to destroy
You play with my world
Like it's your little toy
You put a gun in my hand
And you hide from my eyes
And you turn and run farther
When the fast bullets fly.
Like Judas of old
You lie and deceive
A world war can be won
You want me to believe
But I see through your eyes
And I see through your brain
Like I see through the water
That runs down my drain.
You fasten all the triggers
For the others to fire
Then you set back and watch
When the death count gets higher
You hide in your mansion'
As young people's blood
Flows out of their bodies
And is buried in the mud.
You've thrown the worst fear
That can ever be hurled
Fear to bring children
Into the world
For threatening my baby
Unborn and unnamed
You ain't worth the blood
That runs in your veins.
How much do I know
To talk out of turn
You might say that I'm young
You might say I'm unlearned
But there's one thing I know
Though I'm younger than you
That even Jesus would never
Forgive what you do.
Let me ask you one question
Is your money that good
Will it buy you forgiveness
Do you think that it could
I think you will find
When your death takes its toll
All the money you made
Will never buy back your soul.
And I hope that you die
And your death'll come soon
I will follow your casket
In the pale afternoon
And I'll watch while you're lowered
Down to your deathbed
And I'll stand over your grave
'Til I'm sure that you're dead.
that's only like ~30 seconds in jail for each minute of phone service he stole. At least they didn't sentence him to full price.
paywall? I'm not sure that means what you think it means. NYTimes.com registration is free. With adblocker and free registration, its one of the most useful sites on the web. It's an annoying extra step you only have to do once, but it doesn't cost any money.
For what its worth, its McDonald's not, MacDonald's, if we're talking about the crappy burger joint.
The Supreme Court. End of story. (until they're all dead and a new appeal challenges the old ruling).
The real reason probably has a lot more to do with the fact that we're even sitting around here on a Saturday afternoon questioning the decision. Geeks tend to think they're smarter than everyone else (just because its usually true, doesn't mean it always is), tend to question authority, and hate to be told what to do. If you give a geek a little bit of authority, they tend to get extremely dictatorial over their small little domain.
How likely is it that "true geeks" would really be able to fit into a military command structure and obey the orders of officers and the President without a million back-talking questions and suggestions about how things "should" be done?
Training people who learn the technical aspects of the job is probably easier than training people who already know (or think they know, more likely) about network security to just shut up, do what their told, and wear the clothes they're supposed to wear. There are plenty of smart people who didn't spend all their childhood fucking around with computers who are more than capable of being taught how to do what we do, and who also haven't yet developed mini god complexes or root syndrome.
I was medically disqualified from service (allegedly i have some mild bit of asthma that makes me barely fail a PFT), and spent my childhood being a geek. Not going to say I like being told what to do or that I don't have root syndrome, but that's why I'm in the group of people not suited to that sort of gig, and that's fine because I don't really want it.
The greatest American general? Would that be Patton? Or Lee? Or the only man ever to get higher marks at West Point than Lee, Douglas MacArthur? Pershing was no slouch either. Eisenhower had actually been subordinate to both Pershing and MacArthur earlier in his career, and only a lucky break getting assigned to the General Staff in D.C. that allowed him some paper-pusher promotions got him to the head of the queue. He barely even had any combat experience.
The war in Germany was limited because the Americans and British, while not pro-Nazi (except the people where were), weren't really anti-German. There are too many Germans in the US and Britain for that to happen, and the current set of British Royals are German. My grandfather on my mother's side fought in Europe during WWII, but before he shipped out they trained him for bayonet on dolls with Japanese features.
The American people at that time probably would have accepted extremely high losses fighting the Japanese and wouldn't take anything less than unconditional surrender. If they hadn't given up after the two nukes, no one here would probably ever have heard the phrase "made in Japan."
But what the OP was referring two was more along the lines of the fact that between the US, UK and Canada, we suffered over 10,000 casualties, with well over 2000 of those being actual battlefield deaths, just on D-DAY. Just D-DAY, not even the whole Normandy campaign. We have had a bit of 4,000 dead in all 7 years of the Iraq war, while we lost over 418,000 in WWII, or about 0.32% of our population at the start of the war.
I'm not trying to diminish the feeling of loss I'm sure the families of the 4,000+ US soldiers who have died in Iraq must feel. However, the fact that in 7 years we've lost about twice the number of soldiers we lost trying to get ashore in France on 6 June, 1944, speaks volumes about what "limited" war might actually be.
tl;dr you're wrong.