"Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems you're just moving logic into a less accessible place and to a language less developers have extensive experience with."
I'll correct you: 1) It's only processing at the proper level: you process data relationships at the Relationship DataBase Manager 2) Something most application developers seem to forget is that they do NOT own the data, neither does it their applications. Data is a company asset which belongs to the company to access in any means it needs. That implies that in order to insure data quality you need to control it -again, at the RDBM level, not the application's, since the same data can and should be accessed by other means.
Do you have business rules? Then sure, go build them on the application level (and make them reacheable by API means). But set data management rules at the data manager level where it makes most sense.
"Has the mantle been definitively proven to exist?"
Yes. "The Moho" sounds tad cool, but what they are talking here is about the Mohorovicic discontinuity which is, you almost can suspect it, a (seismic) discontinuity researched by some Croatian by that name.
So there might be minor surprises about its exact nature or physical properties but, yes, we positively know the mantle is there just like you know the train is coming when you hear its whistle.
"The purpose of the system is to keep you from being robbed."
Wrong. The purpose of he system is to make money.
"Until burglars learn that a sticker like "security by X" is a joke, they'll move on to a house with no sticker. So there's probably still some value for now."
Oh, you meant the purpose... of the customer. Well, a friend of mine did exactly that: he put a sticker of a reputed security company on his door and done with it. Same security level at a lower cost.
"It's completely irresponsible to go into debt without any plan on how you're going to pay it back"
Maybe you are right but then, what would you call the one that lends money to somebody without a pay back plan?
Specially considering that most probably the lender knows to the petty detail what are the chances and income distributions for somebody majoring in hellenic studies while the 18 y.o. potential borrower does not.
"I'd like to see the people with the most money who also claim that there is a "shortage" to offer to pay the tuition for X number of STEM classes so that students could take them for FREE."
"on one hand i agree that you cannot DENY anybody right to group up and self organize, but unions are opposite of that, first they FORCE workers to "self organize" (be members) otherwise they cant work for that specific company, also they FORCE company to employ one of people on their "approved list" even though company might found someone willing to do better work and/or for less money"
In other words, you are in need of European-style unions.
"All it shows is that people are influenced more by the people around them than by people far away."
No, it isn't. The between-the-lines message is that bosses somehow tend to be more sociopathic than average and you can "catch" his sociopathy by being near him. But then, it tends to be more minions than bosses so the expected conclusion of your premise would be that bosses tend to behave more ethically the nearer to their people they are instead of the other way around.
So, if anything, it shows that people are more influenced by *perceived higher authority* the nearer the authority figure is which, again, is a platitude since authority can basically be defined as the ability to shape others' behaviour to start with.
Of course it is. The article's conclusion is naive at best and stupid at worst since the real conclusion is "being near the boss facilitates being at boss' reach" which, of course, is a platitude.
You, as a hire are in one of two situations: you either are happy with your position or you are not.
If the former you don't want to be too near to the boss to avoid the chance of being a pawn on his intrigues (if you are OK chances if you move is to the worse), but not so far away that he forgets why is he paying you.
If the later, you are either trying to climb the ladder, in which case you definitely want to be near your boss you maximize your chances of promotion (at a higher chance of screwing up, either really or in his perception) or you are trying to get out of the company, in which case you, yes, want to be as far from your boss as possible to maximize the chances he forgets about you.
Now, you don't need a study to probe the obvious but, if any, to disprove this "common sense" approach.
"After all, why can't they just redesign the audio socket so it's a couple of millimeters thinner?"
They probably can but then, what would you call an object 1.5mm width and ending on a point? That's a connector no more but a needle. And a needle has two problems: it's fragile and it can hurt. Not such a wise decision for a connector.
"In other words, masking one's origin to make it appear you're part of a different network..."
Sorry no, but no. Masking oneself to look like coming from a different network is -who would imagine, "masquerading". VPN is tunneling so you don't see the multiple hops between your network and the one on the other side of the tunnel so, in fact, it more helps than hinders, the other side to know your real IP address.
"The term VPN has been co-opted by providers that provide VPN and routing services. People pay for this service so that they can mask their true location -- for example, to use video services not available in their country."
Oh, I see now! People got fooled into buying a VPN service when they wanted and anonymizer service.
"Individual users are not using the VPN to connect to each other, but instead to connect to the VPN endpoint, from where their encapsulated packets are routed to the destination website"
And then, the protocol works as designed instead of how an ignoramus thought it worked. Surprise, surprise!
" This is more about the services offered to show a VPN providers IP vs an ISP rather than a traditional "two distant offices" secure networking."
So what? The expectation is exactly the same: what happens on a node working as ending point for a VPN with regards other networks that node has access to is up to the node, not the VPN.
So if a VPN ends in my computer I'll give for granted all other networks on my computer are visible to the other end unless I'm taking positive steps for that not being the case.
"you see everything in HDR, hear everything from miles away and just see solutions after solutions to almost every problem."
You *think* you see everything in HDR, you *think* you hear everything from miles away, you *think* you see solutions to almost every problem.
One of my funniest experiences involving LSD is a friend of me taking a dose and telling me -about five hundred times, not an exageration, the real number, he couldn't feel any effect.
"As the CIO, I would ask the source code to be extracted from SVN/GIT, and then everyone who touched the last version of ANY file that has dynamic (SQL injection vulnerable) SQL in it be immediately fired."
That's once thing (among alot others) explaining why you'll never be a CIO so, don't worry, you won't have the chance to fire anybody.
"The "anonymizing" part is that the VPN becomes your IP for that session. "
That's a side effect at most.
"Your entire OS, all apps, web use can only connect via the VPN, no leaking an ISP IP out"
Sorry, but seemingly you don't understand what you are talking about. Once stablished, your Virtual Private Network is a Network just like any other else: you can route it, bridge it, masquerade it... In fact, that's the very goal of a VPN: making two topologically disconnected networks look like connected through a topologically local network (single hop).
"The idea that anyone looking back from the VPN IP can see the users ISP is not the best news."
Well, it isn't even news: that's the exact feature that allows, for instance, to connect two distant offices' networks as if they were one hop away.
"Masking one's origin is often the entire purpose of a VPN, at least from a consumer standpoint."
Uhhh... nope, why should that be the case?
The purpose of a Virtual Private Network is to, well, Virtually making a Private Network, as if it was Local (LAN is another interesting acronim here) over other non-local networks.
And then, the article states " The technique involves a port-forwarding tactic whereby a hacker using the same VPN as its victim can forward traffic through a certain port, which exposes the unsuspecting user's IP address."
The same VPN! Why talking about "unsuspecting users"? The very purpose of a VPN is that those using it can get in touch to begin with!
"For example, in the old days we didn't have desktop environments. We only had window managers. So instead of being able to start Gnome or KDE from the system and receive a login screen, you'd login to your user account from the text terminal, run a script like "startx" that would have your preferred window manager and settings in it, and that would start the X Window System"
Uh... your id is lower enough to be around here by that time, but you don't seem to have been using Unix/Linux back then. XDM was first presented in 1988 and it was certainly part of the X Window System, nothing related to desktop managers (KDE is from 1996 and Gnome from 1997).
"when you wanted a GUI login, you had to run that as a separate app to replace the startx script, which made those use cases really klunky and error-prone."
Funny you say that. I only started to have problems with display managers (i.e.: remote session selection) when systems started to move away from XMD in favour of gdm and kdm.
"And not only was their no common sort of print dialog"
Yes, there was.
"Copy/paste usually only worked for apps that used the basic terminal paste capabilities; apps that had more advanced cut/paste capabilities were generally incompatible with each other"
Just like now. Apps always had access to the X Window buffer; it was non-well-behavioured apps those that didn't work (usually with roots coming out from Unix).
You made a seemingly cogent argument, only one that is not so much tied to historical facts.
"I keep saying it, systemd not an init system. KDE and GNOME should not depend on an init system."
Well, if KDE or GNOME shouldn't depend on an init system and systemd is not an init system, what's the problem with KDE or GNOME depending on systemd, you mister sophist?
Slashdot Mirror
"Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems you're just moving logic into a less accessible place and to a language less developers have extensive experience with."
I'll correct you:
1) It's only processing at the proper level: you process data relationships at the Relationship DataBase Manager
2) Something most application developers seem to forget is that they do NOT own the data, neither does it their applications. Data is a company asset which belongs to the company to access in any means it needs. That implies that in order to insure data quality you need to control it -again, at the RDBM level, not the application's, since the same data can and should be accessed by other means.
Do you have business rules? Then sure, go build them on the application level (and make them reacheable by API means). But set data management rules at the data manager level where it makes most sense.
"does it matter if the filling in the balloon is molten rock?"
If you ever had a nerdy card it's your time to return it... But of course yes: viscosity makes all the difference.
"Has the mantle been definitively proven to exist?"
Yes. "The Moho" sounds tad cool, but what they are talking here is about the Mohorovicic discontinuity which is, you almost can suspect it, a (seismic) discontinuity researched by some Croatian by that name.
So there might be minor surprises about its exact nature or physical properties but, yes, we positively know the mantle is there just like you know the train is coming when you hear its whistle.
"Don't try to bat with the big boys. They will either slaughter you in negotiations or laugh you out of the room."
Bill Gates' early relationship with IBM really proves your point.
"The purpose of the system is to keep you from being robbed."
Wrong. The purpose of he system is to make money.
"Until burglars learn that a sticker like "security by X" is a joke, they'll move on to a house with no sticker. So there's probably still some value for now."
Oh, you meant the purpose... of the customer. Well, a friend of mine did exactly that: he put a sticker of a reputed security company on his door and done with it. Same security level at a lower cost.
"Smart people put their "SOC" in their existing "NOC" anyway"
Exactly this. Security not an integral part of strategy, design and operations? EPIC FAIL.
"They want to bypass geo-blocking. That is a perfect use for a VPN."
No, it isn't, or else, this full Slashdot article wouldn't exist.
"It's completely irresponsible to go into debt without any plan on how you're going to pay it back"
Maybe you are right but then, what would you call the one that lends money to somebody without a pay back plan?
Specially considering that most probably the lender knows to the petty detail what are the chances and income distributions for somebody majoring in hellenic studies while the 18 y.o. potential borrower does not.
"I'd like to see the people with the most money who also claim that there is a "shortage" to offer to pay the tuition for X number of STEM classes so that students could take them for FREE."
Aren't there private grants in your country?
"on one hand i agree that you cannot DENY anybody right to group up and self organize,
but unions are opposite of that, first they FORCE workers to "self organize" (be members) otherwise they cant work for that specific company,
also they FORCE company to employ one of people on their "approved list" even though company might found someone willing to do better work and/or for less money"
In other words, you are in need of European-style unions.
All right... all right... but apart from that, what have the Romans done for us?
"All it shows is that people are influenced more by the people around them than by people far away."
No, it isn't. The between-the-lines message is that bosses somehow tend to be more sociopathic than average and you can "catch" his sociopathy by being near him. But then, it tends to be more minions than bosses so the expected conclusion of your premise would be that bosses tend to behave more ethically the nearer to their people they are instead of the other way around.
So, if anything, it shows that people are more influenced by *perceived higher authority* the nearer the authority figure is which, again, is a platitude since authority can basically be defined as the ability to shape others' behaviour to start with.
"It also has the reverse effect"
Of course it is. The article's conclusion is naive at best and stupid at worst since the real conclusion is "being near the boss facilitates being at boss' reach" which, of course, is a platitude.
You, as a hire are in one of two situations: you either are happy with your position or you are not.
If the former you don't want to be too near to the boss to avoid the chance of being a pawn on his intrigues (if you are OK chances if you move is to the worse), but not so far away that he forgets why is he paying you.
If the later, you are either trying to climb the ladder, in which case you definitely want to be near your boss you maximize your chances of promotion (at a higher chance of screwing up, either really or in his perception) or you are trying to get out of the company, in which case you, yes, want to be as far from your boss as possible to maximize the chances he forgets about you.
Now, you don't need a study to probe the obvious but, if any, to disprove this "common sense" approach.
"After all, why can't they just redesign the audio socket so it's a couple of millimeters thinner?"
They probably can but then, what would you call an object 1.5mm width and ending on a point? That's a connector no more but a needle. And a needle has two problems: it's fragile and it can hurt. Not such a wise decision for a connector.
"In other words, masking one's origin to make it appear you're part of a different network..."
Sorry no, but no. Masking oneself to look like coming from a different network is -who would imagine, "masquerading". VPN is tunneling so you don't see the multiple hops between your network and the one on the other side of the tunnel so, in fact, it more helps than hinders, the other side to know your real IP address.
"VPN means "encrypted proxy". Nothing more, nothing less, at least in this context."
Yeah, well... and RAID means backup. But then, surprise, surprise!
"To avoid a subpoena for the records of the connecting IP address, or to fool geo-IP based content restrictions"
No. That's -maybe, what a consumer would want, not what a VPN offers.
VPN offers seamless connectivity between two non-topologically contiguous data networks, not anonymity.
"The term VPN has been co-opted by providers that provide VPN and routing services. People pay for this service so that they can mask their true location -- for example, to use video services not available in their country."
Oh, I see now! People got fooled into buying a VPN service when they wanted and anonymizer service.
"Individual users are not using the VPN to connect to each other, but instead to connect to the VPN endpoint, from where their encapsulated packets are routed to the destination website"
And then, the protocol works as designed instead of how an ignoramus thought it worked. Surprise, surprise!
" This is more about the services offered to show a VPN providers IP vs an ISP rather than a traditional "two distant offices" secure networking."
So what? The expectation is exactly the same: what happens on a node working as ending point for a VPN with regards other networks that node has access to is up to the node, not the VPN.
So if a VPN ends in my computer I'll give for granted all other networks on my computer are visible to the other end unless I'm taking positive steps for that not being the case.
"you see everything in HDR, hear everything from miles away and just see solutions after solutions to almost every problem."
You *think* you see everything in HDR, you *think* you hear everything from miles away, you *think* you see solutions to almost every problem.
One of my funniest experiences involving LSD is a friend of me taking a dose and telling me -about five hundred times, not an exageration, the real number, he couldn't feel any effect.
"As the CIO, I would ask the source code to be extracted from SVN/GIT, and then everyone who touched the last version of ANY file that has dynamic (SQL injection vulnerable) SQL in it be immediately fired."
That's once thing (among alot others) explaining why you'll never be a CIO so, don't worry, you won't have the chance to fire anybody.
"The "anonymizing" part is that the VPN becomes your IP for that session. "
That's a side effect at most.
"Your entire OS, all apps, web use can only connect via the VPN, no leaking an ISP IP out"
Sorry, but seemingly you don't understand what you are talking about. Once stablished, your Virtual Private Network is a Network just like any other else: you can route it, bridge it, masquerade it... In fact, that's the very goal of a VPN: making two topologically disconnected networks look like connected through a topologically local network (single hop).
"The idea that anyone looking back from the VPN IP can see the users ISP is not the best news."
Well, it isn't even news: that's the exact feature that allows, for instance, to connect two distant offices' networks as if they were one hop away.
"Masking one's origin is often the entire purpose of a VPN, at least from a consumer standpoint."
Uhhh... nope, why should that be the case?
The purpose of a Virtual Private Network is to, well, Virtually making a Private Network, as if it was Local (LAN is another interesting acronim here) over other non-local networks.
And then, the article states " The technique involves a port-forwarding tactic whereby a hacker using the same VPN as its victim can forward traffic through a certain port, which exposes the unsuspecting user's IP address."
The same VPN! Why talking about "unsuspecting users"? The very purpose of a VPN is that those using it can get in touch to begin with!
"For example, in the old days we didn't have desktop environments. We only had window managers. So instead of being able to start Gnome or KDE from the system and receive a login screen, you'd login to your user account from the text terminal, run a script like "startx" that would have your preferred window manager and settings in it, and that would start the X Window System"
Uh... your id is lower enough to be around here by that time, but you don't seem to have been using Unix/Linux back then. XDM was first presented in 1988 and it was certainly part of the X Window System, nothing related to desktop managers (KDE is from 1996 and Gnome from 1997).
"when you wanted a GUI login, you had to run that as a separate app to replace the startx script, which made those use cases really klunky and error-prone."
Funny you say that. I only started to have problems with display managers (i.e.: remote session selection) when systems started to move away from XMD in favour of gdm and kdm.
"And not only was their no common sort of print dialog"
Yes, there was.
"Copy/paste usually only worked for apps that used the basic terminal paste capabilities; apps that had more advanced cut/paste capabilities were generally incompatible with each other"
Just like now. Apps always had access to the X Window buffer; it was non-well-behavioured apps those that didn't work (usually with roots coming out from Unix).
You made a seemingly cogent argument, only one that is not so much tied to historical facts.
"I keep saying it, systemd not an init system. KDE and GNOME should not depend on an init system."
Well, if KDE or GNOME shouldn't depend on an init system and systemd is not an init system, what's the problem with KDE or GNOME depending on systemd, you mister sophist?