"Yet the IT world strolls along day to day, without much really actively happening to prevent serious down-the-road problems."
You say this as though there is some dereliction of duty among the IT folks. There are people (http://www.antiphishing.org/, http://www.openantivirus.org/) working on these things. In their spare time too--right? It's quite apparent that your gripe is with M$ and the the general population that has bought into the monopoly, but there's only so much you can do with 6 billion Elvis fans, and the greedy bastards that want to exploit them. I'm sure that most geeks would like to blow them off the planet, but like you, there's no "real" solution among them. I don't think that they (the IT world) should take the hit for an insurmountable task.
You've equated the catastrophies iminent to the internet with global warming. I can see the correlation, however the internet is fairly new compared to the first time we put CO into the atmosphere. Man's presence on Earth is undergoing a huge learning curve, as are man's dealings with the internet. It wasn't long ago that huge corporations were destroying the planet in the name of profit, and the good of human life, but eventually the people that saw the wrong of it came out of the woodwork, and protested. It's still not right, but it's headed in the right direction--I hope. Now, the ones that see the wrong of the "inter-connected" world, and all of the bad that it can inflict are starting to come out of the woodwork. Exponentially so, as is the pace of technology.
The doctor's kids are always sick, the mechanic's car is always broke. Does this mean we are doomed to be ill (bird-flu notwithstanding:-)), or that our cars won't work? No, we are just living the human life, and sometimes--cough...9/11--it takes a catastophy to put things to work....
BTW I'm not an IT guy, I'm just an aerospace weenie that is just as scared of the status-quo as you are. Yet I do have a little faith in the fact that, while most people need a little nudging, a lot of people are paying attention (like me--I carry my own disk with FireFox, AdAware, and OpenOffice--and spread it to anyone that listens).
Very insightful comment. However, "Mrs Grundy" is only prevalent in the smaller towns and nicer neighborhoods. The more dense the population, the harder it is for her to keep track.
If you'll allow me to expand on this: (whoops--too late:-) Anyone that chooses to live in 'any' societal setting is subject to some form of scrutiny. Whether it's speeding/red-light/street cameras, "Mrs. Grundy", or the nice folks waiting for the next asteroid to come pick you up....SOMEBODY is watching you, and your actions are kept in an archive--somewhere.
Now, to get to the meat of the topic. My problem with 'this' kind of scrutiny is that it is more profit-driven than it is safety/public interest driven. I'm sure that there are statistics that can quote 'lives saved', or 'terrorists thwarted', but all I hear on the news about these cameras is the amount of revenue generated for the city. I'm sure the city isn't the only one profiting either. Someone created the technology, and someone maitains the system. It's a win-win situation for the profiteers, but we ("...the so-called 'normal' human beings") lose.
They accept our taxes to pay for the system, and they profit from the revenues generated.
turning your boss over to/., and having your boss and every other PHB flamed, why don't you just be honest? If you're intelligent enough to start this flamewar, you are (should be) intelligent enough to explain the inaccuracies of your boss' thinking, without throwing anybody under the bus.
Either you truly hate your boss, or you were just looking for that explosive topic that would finally get through the editors.
Frankly, I'm happy with just the download numbers.
In order for the "actual" numbers to be realized, some sort of registration would have to be employed--or maybe a/. poll could answer the question:-)
Let them gloat in their numbers, and let us revel in the the fact that it just works! No strings attached.
Sorry, what I was asking was--"isn't 'root' vulnerable at this point? I've done apt-get, and YOU(Yast Online Update), but I don't understand the mechanics. YOU is behind a GUI (sort of), and it doesn't let you(me) know who is vulnerable. If someone got lucky, and found an open port while I was updating--would I be comprimised?
FWIW--since I've posted, I've gotten some off-the-wall files on my desktop...
Maybe 'root' is just one of my problems...
Slashdot Mirror
"...but now I can under when I want to."
So where were you when 'go' was supposed to be there?
"Yet the IT world strolls along day to day, without much really actively happening to prevent serious down-the-road problems."
You say this as though there is some dereliction of duty among the IT folks. There are people (http://www.antiphishing.org/, http://www.openantivirus.org/) working on these things. In their spare time too--right? It's quite apparent that your gripe is with M$ and the the general population that has bought into the monopoly, but there's only so much you can do with 6 billion Elvis fans, and the greedy bastards that want to exploit them. I'm sure that most geeks would like to blow them off the planet, but like you, there's no "real" solution among them. I don't think that they (the IT world) should take the hit for an insurmountable task.
You've equated the catastrophies iminent to the internet with global warming. I can see the correlation, however the internet is fairly new compared to the first time we put CO into the atmosphere. Man's presence on Earth is undergoing a huge learning curve, as are man's dealings with the internet. It wasn't long ago that huge corporations were destroying the planet in the name of profit, and the good of human life, but eventually the people that saw the wrong of it came out of the woodwork, and protested. It's still not right, but it's headed in the right direction--I hope. Now, the ones that see the wrong of the "inter-connected" world, and all of the bad that it can inflict are starting to come out of the woodwork. Exponentially so, as is the pace of technology.
The doctor's kids are always sick, the mechanic's car is always broke. Does this mean we are doomed to be ill (bird-flu notwithstanding :-)), or that our cars won't work? No, we are just living the human life, and sometimes--cough...9/11--it takes a catastophy to put things to work....
BTW I'm not an IT guy, I'm just an aerospace weenie that is just as scared of the status-quo as you are. Yet I do have a little faith in the fact that, while most people need a little nudging, a lot of people are paying attention (like me--I carry my own disk with FireFox, AdAware, and OpenOffice--and spread it to anyone that listens).
"Step 3: Download free MP3s."
Why do I have to download them? Can't the rootkit just go fetch 'em?
Very insightful comment. However, "Mrs Grundy" is only prevalent in the smaller towns and nicer neighborhoods. The more dense the population, the harder it is for her to keep track.
:-)
If you'll allow me to expand on this: (whoops--too late
Anyone that chooses to live in 'any' societal setting is subject to some form of scrutiny. Whether it's speeding/red-light/street cameras, "Mrs. Grundy", or the nice folks waiting for the next asteroid to come pick you up....SOMEBODY is watching you, and your actions are kept in an archive--somewhere.
Now, to get to the meat of the topic. My problem with 'this' kind of scrutiny is that it is more profit-driven than it is safety/public interest driven. I'm sure that there are statistics that can quote 'lives saved', or 'terrorists thwarted', but all I hear on the news about these cameras is the amount of revenue generated for the city. I'm sure the city isn't the only one profiting either. Someone created the technology, and someone maitains the system. It's a win-win situation for the profiteers, but we ("...the so-called 'normal' human beings") lose.
They accept our taxes to pay for the system, and they profit from the revenues generated.
turning your boss over to /., and having your boss and every other PHB flamed, why don't you just be honest? If you're intelligent enough to start this flamewar, you are (should be) intelligent enough to explain the inaccuracies of your boss' thinking, without throwing anybody under the bus.
Either you truly hate your boss, or you were just looking for that explosive topic that would finally get through the editors.
" All but 1 woman managers I ahve had were worl aholics...?!?"
As I read this sententence, I could only think--alcoholics?
"...egregious spelling and grammer errors..."
I guess we can't be expected to do all of it, huh?
Sorry. It was insightful--I just couldn't help myself.
Frankly, I'm happy with just the download numbers. In order for the "actual" numbers to be realized, some sort of registration would have to be employed--or maybe a /. poll could answer the question :-)
Let them gloat in their numbers, and let us revel in the the fact that it just works! No strings attached.
Sorry, what I was asking was--"isn't 'root' vulnerable at this point? I've done apt-get, and YOU(Yast Online Update), but I don't understand the mechanics. YOU is behind a GUI (sort of), and it doesn't let you(me) know who is vulnerable. If someone got lucky, and found an open port while I was updating--would I be comprimised? FWIW--since I've posted, I've gotten some off-the-wall files on my desktop... Maybe 'root' is just one of my problems...
...forgive my ignorance, but what about running Yast Online Update, or apt-get, where you have to be root,but running as a normal user?