Your government and press would rather you did not use the internet as a source of information. Some of it is beyond their control and may say things that They do not want you to know.
Throughout the existence of the internet, we have been told about all the bad stuff on it. It has varied from The Anarchists Cookbook, to child porn, to conspiracies to crime and fraud and so on. All things that would also plague you if you walked through the wrong parts of town at the wrong times and looked like a suitable target.
"They" would prefer it if you got your news through proper channels, controlled either by the government or responsible corporations like News International (Fox, Sky, NoTW etc).
Governments like what you are planning, because the internet spreads protests all over the place. The "Arab Spring" didn't just worry middle eastern and Chinese dictators. It will have been noticed absolutely everywhere and steps will have been taken, People like Rupert Murdoch want this stuff properly controlled for similar reasons. In the UK, his organisation is suffering because some of its misdeeds got out and people objected. The authorities must have already known but kindly did not do anything about it. If you choose to get your news from Fox or whatever, you will be spared from hearing about too much in future.
When I install Ubuntu and I want certain things that they have defined as non-free, I have to download them separately. Google should do this.
For example, if it is the FAT32 drivers that are the source of FUD, Google should not include them with Android any more. Manufacturers are then not "stealing" any imaginary property and the necessary code should be available on Google Marketplace. MS can then take on Google instead of collecting protection money from handset manufactuers.
The NHS is set up clearly and specifically for reasons of public health. As soon as it allows a US private company "inside" we have a problem.
The only people working in or for public healthcare should only be interested in public healthcare. Money, IT, politics etc should be tools to get the job done without that aim being comnpromised.
is quite possibly not what I consider inappropriate. I considered violence and guns inappropriate for under 10s without adult supervision. Many people on your side of the Atlantic are much more worried about a 13 year old doing a picture search for stuff that has never hurt anyone.
Talk to your kids. Educate them. Explain what you think is good and bad and why this is so. If my kids looked at stuff they shouldn't have, they did it quietly and unobtrusively. The only thing I didn't like was MSN messenger and I taught them the do's and don'ts of that as well.
Then set them up an account for YouTube and restrict the access it gives. If you have educated them properly, they should respect your preferences enough not to rub it in your face.
Then you need to get well up in a big organisation.
Do you know what you need to get past an HR department and managers that do not have a clue about what you do?
That's right - you need a degree...
Now I know that many people think that the only way to work is either self employed, a small company where everyone knows everyone else or a startup.
This is just statistically unlikely. Because big companies hire more people, they have a bigger part of the workforce - that is just arithmetic.
If you end up working for anything that has hundreds of employees without that bit of paper, you will probably carry on doing your job. You will not be in charge and you will not get paid as much as the idiot with a BA in greek literature who is your boss.
If you are working, that is what evening classes are for. You might need to move after you get that qualification, but you will have better options.
the photoshop.com application. It can be set to upload pictures as you take them. I have been using the Android version for a while now. I understand there is an IOS version too.
By the time the criminals or police notice you, the pictures are online.
Alternatively, send it straight to Facebook or Twitter.
The only obvious explanation to me is that someone wants to prove that they do not believe in any sort of climate change.
Someone should check. Someone somewhere may be a patsy for some industry that is a known producer of greenhouse gas or something...
I would agree that some people mix up invented with discovered, Perhaps they may be the same people that mix up other words like
"Can you borrow me a pen" meaning they would like you to lend them one. Or
"I have to itch my back" when they are goiung to scratch it.
Those are probably just British English examples but you may know some wherever you are.
I suspect many people on/. can tell the difference. Perhaps a lot of IP enthusiasts like to mix up discover with invent. It helps with their more questionable activities. Nonetheless, the two are very different concepts.
You discover something that already existed but you, and perhaps others, did not know about. You invent something that did not actually exist. It can be solid like a jet engine or conceptual like an algorithm. Someone can no more invent radioactivity than a new exoplanet.
Firstly, nobody "invented" radioactivity. The Big Bang was a nuclear explosion. We are (a very small) part of the fallout.
You could say that someone invented nuclear power. This is not the same thing as radioactivity. Some might say it uses radioactivity but for better explanations you should read a textbook or even Wikipedia.
Spinal subluxations have been around a lot longer than human generated radioactivity. The fact that they have increased does not mean that they are caused by radioactive leaks/fallout. Correlation is not causation. They may be related but there are a lot more people around that there was in the time of the Curies and a lot of the things that people died of back then are far less prevalent.
Cancer is a bigger problem and some most definitely is related to radioactivity. We definitely need to deal with that. Closing down all nuclear activity will not do this. It will help the uninformed feel good. It will not make the world a better place. It will make life harder - unless you think that we can make up the deficit from renewables? I suggest you read up on that myth too,
Wanting to keep irrelevant, unknown and insecure hardware off the network is not just 1990s. It is how it has worked since there have been networks. I imagine it goes back further than that. I am sure that the people at Bletchley Park were pretty keen to be sure what they were connecting to their nice new computer.
As someone else here says, yes I do work in healthcare and we have actually got policies. Even if you don't do either, you are still obliged to keep things secure. If you have personal or financial data anywhere on your systems, there are a whole raft of laws that you have to follow. If you think you can keep the network secure while allowing unknown devices access to your stuff, you really have not looked into it. Is that phone rooted? Does that netbook have cracking software on it? Is the A/V up to date? Is the HDD encrypted. Can I disable copying files onto it - or just copying text from one document to a new one on the c: drive? If it is a corporate system, we can control exactly what is on it and what is done with it.
If you want to bring your phone to work, no problem. I bring mine but I do not connect it to the network. If you need a particular piece of kit, we will buy it. If we will not buy it, it is because you don't need it enough.
You need email on your phone? Have this Blackberry. Don't like them and would rather use your own Android/iPhone/whatever? Your email preferences are not work related.
Feel that you would be more efficient with 4 28" screens than just the 1 22" one? Make a case for your needs and if they will make the place more productive, you could be in luck.
Hate the Dell laptops we use? So do I. These are what we have.
It doesn't matter if you are a baby boomer, generation X, Y or Z. You are here to work. Just like you may need a better seat but make do with what you have, computers are a tool supplied to you by your employer. You are here to work. Do the best you can with what you have.
Absolutely! Recently,my manager was on holiday and our director walks into the room with a small Android phone and said "Can you connect the new chairmans smartphone to the hospital network?" It was not a request.
I was able to go up and say "No" without any qualms. I think the lady on the HelpDesk might not have felt so free to do this. I have previously given similar replies to new directors, doctors and (medical) consultants. It requires me to be able to quote the official policies. That is part of my job.
No, I am not a manager. I do not wear a suit to work. I do not even wear a tie. I am the guy who fixes things. Telling people that they cannot connect their own iphone, netbook, fondleslab or USB toy to a corporate network is basic security. If you have no confidential data to look after perhaps the thought of virus, trojan or spyware ridden systems connecting up to your network does not worry you. If 17% of companies have nothing they need to protect, that is up to them.
You are not unique. We also have people in the UK who have been taught that using medieval units of measure makes them special. These people here tend to ignore foreign news on the TV, be very wary of what they consider "foreign" foods and boast that they do not speak any other language. Many tend to have politics that I consider 'right of centre' and want to remove this country from the EU.
I am a bit to young to be much good with most non-metric units. I am only 51. I know my weight in kilogrammes (note the correct spelling) and my height in metres. I know the latter is 6 feet because my mother told me. I know that water freezes at 0 degrees and boils at 100. I do however know what a pint of beer looks like - 0.568 litres, because that is what it is still sold in.
There is no valid reason to still use units that were outdated in the time of Ben Franklin. Getting rid of feet, inches, gallons and acres would do nobody any harm except those who feel that anything not from "around here" is nasty.
He never argues that a GUI cannot do the job. He argues that it is much more complicated. The example he gives has the same job being done both ways.
I can give a simpler example. Imagine you have a folder with a huge ammount of pictures that you have been sent from different sources. Your software can deal with most of them but will not even look at.JPEG files. How do you rename them to.JPG?
Assuming this is a Windows PC, open the folder and fo a lot of pointing, right-clicking and typing - or call up a command prompt and type
REN *.JPEG *.JPG
I think changing to the appropriate directory could tane anything from a few seconds to half a minute. The command would process hundreds of files in a minute - possibly even more.
On a Windows PC, there is very little that can't be done by GUI. If there is a CLI alternative, it may be easier, faster and more accurate. You can choose...
I have been dealing with the results of this for nearly two weeks. Whilst it is nice to hear the background story to it, I am puzzled why it has made/. the BBC, The Register and a load of other less useful websites. Why is it big news today?
If anyone has to deal with a PC that has this, the fix is nice and easy.
Copy everything off the users desktop etc - it does not seem to infect stuff
Delete the user profile, reboot and let them log in.
I am sure many people here will feel that the best way not to get it is not run windows in the first place. It is probably enough not to use Windows as a webserver.
I have been using it as a tool to get all our users work moved off their desktops and onto the servers where it should be in the first place. That is a never ending striggle...
A lot of the rest of the world has had appalling pres fear mongering about this. It has varied from clueless editorials to selective reporting to straight inaccuracies.
In the UK, a lot of our press is controlled by the same person as yours - Rupert Murdoch. They seem to be the big FUD generator in this. Whether they have done this because it sells or because they have an agenda, I can't say. (I suspect the latter.)
Not only tablets suck for typing. Laptops do too. If you simply must have a mobile device, get a cheap netbook, If you are away from your house/dorm/desk use remote desktop VPN or whatever to get the performance of a non-mobile device.
PCs are much more powerful for your money. Save $800 by buying a cheaper mobile device and you will have a PC much more powerful PC and a laptop that will connect to it if you have to. If you are only using it from a fixed location, a powerful laptop is a waste of money, a cause of eyestrain and RSI and a target for thieves.
Slashdot Mirror
Only a little.
Your government and press would rather you did not use the internet as a source of information. Some of it is beyond their control and may say things that They do not want you to know.
Throughout the existence of the internet, we have been told about all the bad stuff on it. It has varied from The Anarchists Cookbook, to child porn, to conspiracies to crime and fraud and so on. All things that would also plague you if you walked through the wrong parts of town at the wrong times and looked like a suitable target.
"They" would prefer it if you got your news through proper channels, controlled either by the government or responsible corporations like News International (Fox, Sky, NoTW etc).
Governments like what you are planning, because the internet spreads protests all over the place. The "Arab Spring" didn't just worry middle eastern and Chinese dictators. It will have been noticed absolutely everywhere and steps will have been taken, People like Rupert Murdoch want this stuff properly controlled for similar reasons. In the UK, his organisation is suffering because some of its misdeeds got out and people objected. The authorities must have already known but kindly did not do anything about it. If you choose to get your news from Fox or whatever, you will be spared from hearing about too much in future.
When I install Ubuntu and I want certain things that they have defined as non-free, I have to download them separately. Google should do this.
For example, if it is the FAT32 drivers that are the source of FUD, Google should not include them with Android any more. Manufacturers are then not "stealing" any imaginary property and the necessary code should be available on Google Marketplace. MS can then take on Google instead of collecting protection money from handset manufactuers.
The NHS is set up clearly and specifically for reasons of public health. As soon as it allows a US private company "inside" we have a problem.
The only people working in or for public healthcare should only be interested in public healthcare. Money, IT, politics etc should be tools to get the job done without that aim being comnpromised.
If only...
I am pleased to hear that our government has got something right.
Sadly, this is probably more because of big companies lobbying for contracts than looking after my future power needs.
But if we all use Android, anyone who feels strongly about it can have the module disabled.
Everyone else can just get an IR filter for their phone,
is quite possibly not what I consider inappropriate. I considered violence and guns inappropriate for under 10s without adult supervision. Many people on your side of the Atlantic are much more worried about a 13 year old doing a picture search for stuff that has never hurt anyone.
Talk to your kids. Educate them. Explain what you think is good and bad and why this is so. If my kids looked at stuff they shouldn't have, they did it quietly and unobtrusively. The only thing I didn't like was MSN messenger and I taught them the do's and don'ts of that as well.
Then set them up an account for YouTube and restrict the access it gives. If you have educated them properly, they should respect your preferences enough not to rub it in your face.
Then you need to get well up in a big organisation.
Do you know what you need to get past an HR department and managers that do not have a clue about what you do?
That's right - you need a degree...
Now I know that many people think that the only way to work is either self employed, a small company where everyone knows everyone else or a startup.
This is just statistically unlikely. Because big companies hire more people, they have a bigger part of the workforce - that is just arithmetic.
If you end up working for anything that has hundreds of employees without that bit of paper, you will probably carry on doing your job. You will not be in charge and you will not get paid as much as the idiot with a BA in greek literature who is your boss.
If you are working, that is what evening classes are for. You might need to move after you get that qualification, but you will have better options.
the photoshop.com application. It can be set to upload pictures as you take them. I have been using the Android version for a while now. I understand there is an IOS version too.
By the time the criminals or police notice you, the pictures are online.
Alternatively, send it straight to Facebook or Twitter.
The only obvious explanation to me is that someone wants to prove that they do not believe in any sort of climate change.
Someone should check. Someone somewhere may be a patsy for some industry that is a known producer of greenhouse gas or something...
I would agree that some people mix up invented with discovered, Perhaps they may be the same people that mix up other words like
"Can you borrow me a pen" meaning they would like you to lend them one. Or
"I have to itch my back" when they are goiung to scratch it.
Those are probably just British English examples but you may know some wherever you are.
I suspect many people on /. can tell the difference. Perhaps a lot of IP enthusiasts like to mix up discover with invent. It helps with their more questionable activities. Nonetheless, the two are very different concepts.
You discover something that already existed but you, and perhaps others, did not know about. You invent something that did not actually exist. It can be solid like a jet engine or conceptual like an algorithm. Someone can no more invent radioactivity than a new exoplanet.
No. He discovered/named it. It existed long before him. He invented the scientific idea.
Firstly, nobody "invented" radioactivity. The Big Bang was a nuclear explosion. We are (a very small) part of the fallout.
You could say that someone invented nuclear power. This is not the same thing as radioactivity. Some might say it uses radioactivity but for better explanations you should read a textbook or even Wikipedia.
Spinal subluxations have been around a lot longer than human generated radioactivity. The fact that they have increased does not mean that they are caused by radioactive leaks/fallout. Correlation is not causation. They may be related but there are a lot more people around that there was in the time of the Curies and a lot of the things that people died of back then are far less prevalent.
Cancer is a bigger problem and some most definitely is related to radioactivity. We definitely need to deal with that. Closing down all nuclear activity will not do this. It will help the uninformed feel good. It will not make the world a better place. It will make life harder - unless you think that we can make up the deficit from renewables? I suggest you read up on that myth too,
And they are all your build/shape?
If you live in a city, you are on camera anyway.
You are traceable - how many people with your "taste" in clothes and your fine figure live in your area?
that 1990s way of thinking
Wanting to keep irrelevant, unknown and insecure hardware off the network is not just 1990s. It is how it has worked since there have been networks. I imagine it goes back further than that. I am sure that the people at Bletchley Park were pretty keen to be sure what they were connecting to their nice new computer.
As someone else here says, yes I do work in healthcare and we have actually got policies. Even if you don't do either, you are still obliged to keep things secure. If you have personal or financial data anywhere on your systems, there are a whole raft of laws that you have to follow. If you think you can keep the network secure while allowing unknown devices access to your stuff, you really have not looked into it. Is that phone rooted? Does that netbook have cracking software on it? Is the A/V up to date? Is the HDD encrypted. Can I disable copying files onto it - or just copying text from one document to a new one on the c: drive? If it is a corporate system, we can control exactly what is on it and what is done with it.
If you want to bring your phone to work, no problem. I bring mine but I do not connect it to the network. If you need a particular piece of kit, we will buy it. If we will not buy it, it is because you don't need it enough.
You need email on your phone? Have this Blackberry. Don't like them and would rather use your own Android/iPhone/whatever? Your email preferences are not work related.
Feel that you would be more efficient with 4 28" screens than just the 1 22" one? Make a case for your needs and if they will make the place more productive, you could be in luck.
Hate the Dell laptops we use? So do I. These are what we have.
It doesn't matter if you are a baby boomer, generation X, Y or Z. You are here to work. Just like you may need a better seat but make do with what you have, computers are a tool supplied to you by your employer. You are here to work. Do the best you can with what you have.
You're telling him he can't?
Absolutely! Recently,my manager was on holiday and our director walks into the room with a small Android phone and said "Can you connect the new chairmans smartphone to the hospital network?" It was not a request.
I was able to go up and say "No" without any qualms. I think the lady on the HelpDesk might not have felt so free to do this. I have previously given similar replies to new directors, doctors and (medical) consultants. It requires me to be able to quote the official policies. That is part of my job.
No, I am not a manager. I do not wear a suit to work. I do not even wear a tie. I am the guy who fixes things. Telling people that they cannot connect their own iphone, netbook, fondleslab or USB toy to a corporate network is basic security. If you have no confidential data to look after perhaps the thought of virus, trojan or spyware ridden systems connecting up to your network does not worry you. If 17% of companies have nothing they need to protect, that is up to them.
They are saying that if changing to Windows7 would be an upgrade, do it.
As many people here will say going from Linux, BSD, or almost anything apart from Windows, would not be an upgrade so they are not talking to you.
You are not unique. We also have people in the UK who have been taught that using medieval units of measure makes them special. These people here tend to ignore foreign news on the TV, be very wary of what they consider "foreign" foods and boast that they do not speak any other language. Many tend to have politics that I consider 'right of centre' and want to remove this country from the EU.
I am a bit to young to be much good with most non-metric units. I am only 51. I know my weight in kilogrammes (note the correct spelling) and my height in metres. I know the latter is 6 feet because my mother told me. I know that water freezes at 0 degrees and boils at 100. I do however know what a pint of beer looks like - 0.568 litres, because that is what it is still sold in.
There is no valid reason to still use units that were outdated in the time of Ben Franklin. Getting rid of feet, inches, gallons and acres would do nobody any harm except those who feel that anything not from "around here" is nasty.
Did you actually read the article?
He never argues that a GUI cannot do the job. He argues that it is much more complicated. The example he gives has the same job being done both ways.
I can give a simpler example. Imagine you have a folder with a huge ammount of pictures that you have been sent from different sources. Your software can deal with most of them but will not even look at .JPEG files. How do you rename them to .JPG?
Assuming this is a Windows PC, open the folder and fo a lot of pointing, right-clicking and typing - or call up a command prompt and type
REN *.JPEG *.JPG
I think changing to the appropriate directory could tane anything from a few seconds to half a minute. The command would process hundreds of files in a minute - possibly even more.
On a Windows PC, there is very little that can't be done by GUI. If there is a CLI alternative, it may be easier, faster and more accurate. You can choose...
I have been dealing with the results of this for nearly two weeks. Whilst it is nice to hear the background story to it, I am puzzled why it has made /. the BBC, The Register and a load of other less useful websites. Why is it big news today?
If anyone has to deal with a PC that has this, the fix is nice and easy.
Copy everything off the users desktop etc - it does not seem to infect stuff
Delete the user profile, reboot and let them log in.
I am sure many people here will feel that the best way not to get it is not run windows in the first place. It is probably enough not to use Windows as a webserver.
I have been using it as a tool to get all our users work moved off their desktops and onto the servers where it should be in the first place. That is a never ending striggle...
As a fully paid up geek, I have an Android. I am also a poor geek...
I think Android has paid for itself - the interesting question is who did it pay?
A lot of the rest of the world has had appalling pres fear mongering about this. It has varied from clueless editorials to selective reporting to straight inaccuracies.
In the UK, a lot of our press is controlled by the same person as yours - Rupert Murdoch. They seem to be the big FUD generator in this. Whether they have done this because it sells or because they have an agenda, I can't say. (I suspect the latter.)
Not only tablets suck for typing. Laptops do too. If you simply must have a mobile device, get a cheap netbook, If you are away from your house/dorm/desk use remote desktop VPN or whatever to get the performance of a non-mobile device.
PCs are much more powerful for your money. Save $800 by buying a cheaper mobile device and you will have a PC much more powerful PC and a laptop that will connect to it if you have to. If you are only using it from a fixed location, a powerful laptop is a waste of money, a cause of eyestrain and RSI and a target for thieves.
I suspect people on limited budgets are a large and increasing part of the market - perhaps 20%? I guess it depends on how limited...