As a general rule, I tend to not take advice from the guy who 'failed', I can make a couple of guesses as to why you were involved in failed projects
Make all the guesses, rules and SIGHs you want; until you learn how money works they're not worth much.
Given the quick evolution of technology and the explosive growth in storage and computing resources, making an "up front investment" is about as clever as building an airport on a piece of land you don't own. By the time your 3-5 years of depreciation have run, your clever "up front" planning will be as accurate and relevant as an horoscope. Meanwhile, someone who opted to put IT infrastructure in the "services" column has paid exactly for what they have consumed and left the guessing game of capacity planning to the cloud vendor.
By the way, just the fact that you bring up "TCO" shows that you're playing bullshit bingo with bingo cards printed 15 years ago. Time to upgrade your frame of reference, pal.
red people like you [...] Why don't you wait until you have some evidence either way before you start pointing fingers and shaking them? [,,,] ]This is what your kind always claims
Reading this, it's difficult not to immediately think about pots and kettles.
So before you accuse people of pointing fingers without evidence, why don't you start by not doing it yourself?
Bill Maher has shifted to the left and embraced reality
Here's Bill Maher "reality":
Basically, they’re having a family and they’re keeping the mother in jail because she won’t conform to what society feels should be the perfect American family.
That quote is how Bill Maher reacted to a female teacher that was sent to prison for having "an affair" with her 12 years old student.
That wouldn't be a problem if people elected honest people to POTUS and Congress. As well as said people being backed by news organizations that are having a huge fallout of sexual harassment from not only it's CEO but several large name on air personalities like Fox.
It always amaze me how there's a double standard when it comes to sexual harassment stories. Every accusation against Trump or Fox News is automatically believed, but accusations against serial offenders like Bill Clinton or against people like Al Gore or Assange are "conspiracies".
I mean, the Clinton stuff is of epic proportions - not only the rapes but also the cover-up, from burning women's pets alive to getting them fired then investigated by the IRS for "driving a nice car while having no income" - and yet what freak people out is alleged unpleasant behaviors and comments from private citizens.
Don't get me wrong, I personally think Bill O'Reilly is a piece of shit and whether the accusations are true or not I'm delighted to see him shamed publicly. But really, the hypocrisy in those matters is just unbelievable.
backpedaling net neutrality at the behest of their new boss?
If you look at the actual situation instead of focusing on Trump, you'd realize that ISP have basically stopped investing in their network because there's too many restrictions (studies show a drop of 30-40% in investment per year since Title II). Yes, it's a beautiful dream of having private corporations foot the bill for online freedom but that's not how capitalism works. Look at how well making things equal worked for the USSR, or how it helped Venezuela when the governement ended up deciding how much flat screen TV should cost.
Pretty much every week people on Slashdot get their panties in a bunch over Comcast not bringing fiber to such or such neighborhood or Google pulling the plug on expansion plans for Google Fiber. Well that's the price to pay if you want to bask in the glorious warmth of net neutrality. Fire up your 300-baud modem and have at it.
If Chrome on Android would let me read web pages immediately I would be happy enough. It's so bad that the other day I went to the Play store to see if Edge was available for Android.
I guess we'll see at the next election. If they bring in Oprah or Meryl Streep to oppose Trump we'll know it's just a matter of time before we get President Kardashian in the Oval Office. Objectively, anything is now possible. Trump broke the glass floor.
I dare you to look up what they billed the taxpayer for the website and compare it to the workload it can handle. Then let's talk "perfectly acceptable".
I don't know the exact cost, but they actually took action to reduce their IT costs, as required by federal guidelines established under Obama:
Basically they're moving all their stuff to the cloud. They already saved millions with that, you can get all the details in their budget review (which is public).
The Commission made a concerted effort to curb the escalating IT operation and maintenance (O&M) costs back in FY 2014. Prior to FY 2014, the FCC faced ever-increasing costs in operating and maintaining its aging legacy IT systems. To counter these escalating O&M costs, the FCC IT team took the first bold step in early September 2015 by physically relocating over 200 different legacy servers from the FCC’s headquarters in Washington, D.C. to a commercially hosted federalcertified facility located in West Virginia. These servers contained almost 400 different program applications. By physically relocating these servers to a commercially hosted provider, not only will O&M costs be reduced, but it will also allow for improved resiliency and a shift of many legacy applications to the cloud, similar to the Commission’s Consumer Help Desk. In FY 2014, 86 percent of IT funding was utilized for O&M and only 14 percent was utilized for development, modernization, and enhancements (DME). Those percentages are expected to change to 49 percent O&M and 51 percent DME by the end of FY 2017. The savings that will be realized on the O&M side will be redirected to delivering new capabilities.
To put things in perspective: the entire FCC budget is 380 millions. They have 1800 employees, which already eats about half of that budget. Then there's buildings, power/heating/cooling, furniture, copiers, etc. They're not cheap, but I've worked on project in the private sector where more money that than was wasted on failed ERP initiatives.
You find them funny because your share their view. Go on Fox News and watch "Miller Time" with Dennis Miller. He's very intelligent and his humor is smart, but if you happen to be a liberal you won't like him. The thing is, for one Dennis Miller there's 20 Colbert.
What's really creepy is that once again, a majority of liberals take their news from a comedy show and a majority of conservatives take their news from the Twitter feed of a reality TV star turned President.
Remember when people used to call this phenomenon Slashdot Effect?
On a more serious note, is the Trump Administration now going to call Slashdot Effect an "attack," and if so, how is this not a sign of them ramping up the authoritarianism?
the FCC is not the same thing as the Trump administration. They are independent and can't have more than 3/5 of their commissioners coming from the same party, and they are nominated for terms longer than the president's.
Doesn't mean they are competent. But it's not Trump.
Those two things are unrelated. It's perfectly acceptable for a public agency to scale its system to a realistic workload, not for some fluke peak, especially since they're using a cloud provider (where you can run quite a bill).
The real scary thing is that they can't tell the difference between heavy load and a DDOS.
You are so incredibly naive that you would probably also believe Larry if he announced that he was removing all license fees for the Oracle DB.
No, you just jumped to the wrong conclusion. The point here is not that Oracle is honest or dishonest, the point is that their nefarious agenda has OBVIOUSLY nothing to do with selling database licenses to ISP, they're in it because the only segment with some growth in their revenue is the cloud stuff.
It's not enough to piss on companies, you kinda need to make sense too when you do it and that was sorely missing in the OP post.
Given that super-realistic Netflix check-signing scenario you envisioned, I can see how it would be hard to imagine or assess the actual possibilities.
Anyone who follows even remotely the tech industry knows that Oracle is trying to reinvent itself as a cloud player. Their position in this case is obviously linked to that, not to some retarded scheme to possibly sell fucking database licenses to some mysterious entity that would need it to milk customers.
It's clear that both Cisco and Oracle are fuckers. What's also clear is that people on this Net Neutrality topic are in the shoot first, think later mindset, as it's made quite obvious by those lame-ass database licensing scheme accusations.
Oracle is going to make a ton of money selling user tracking databases.
Really? Oracle master plan is to crush net neutrality so they can sell more database licenses to "track users"? What's next, Staples will jump in so they can sell more pens to Netflix who will sign a bunch of checks to ISP? How the fuck can people come up with such ridiculous theories is beyond me.
When Oracle talks about a "highly political hyperbolic battle that is removed from technical, economic, and consumer reality,” they appear to be spot on.
Yes, any company can fail, but the richest one still making the most money per quarter is the least likely to fail.
Did you look at the list before getting your panties in a bunch? All of those companies seemed like they were making shittons of money per quarter.
Apple owes more than 100 billions. Of their pile of cash, only 20 billions are available, the rest is stuck offshore and can't be used to acquire DIsney or anything else in the USA. I don't know what spreadsheet you use to make your investments planning but if it's telling you that Apple is a financially sound company, it's broken. If you want to do some speculation because you expect that other idiots will be willing to pay more for that stock down the road, fine; but don't pretend that it's a wise investment. Their market is saturated, the brand has lost its prestige, and the innovation is gone. You might as well invest in Big Tobbacco.
I recharge my watch every few years in 5 minutes by taking it to the jeweler at the supermarket. The watch it self is 24 years old and was a 21st birthday present from my Dad.
Your story sounds like a high school math exam question.
Were you one of the 3.5 million customers who purchased an Apple Watch in the first quarter of 2017? If so, how do you like Apple's approach to wearables?
Do we get a $25 iTunes gift card if we answer your marketing survey?
Why don't they give some of their iPhones to poor black children?
They already have iPhones. In many poor communities the smartphone is the only way to access internet, and it comes bundled with the carrier contract.
According to a study by the Pew research institute, when it comes to internet access, "12 percent of African-Americans and 13 percent of Latinos are smartphone-reliant, compared with 4 percent of whites."
Yes, because Apple makes $400 on every iPhone they sell. Instead of adding every single one of those $400 to the pile of 200 billions idle dollars they have hidden in foreign countries, they could do things properly.
They have no problem building a $5 billion head office that they will tout as "green" but they can't be bothered with the environmental impact of their products. They are repugnant in a way that even greedy banksters will never approach.
Slashdot Mirror
The numbers in the survey indicate that 78% of Americans are in favor of either the equivalent of Title I or of no regulations at all.
As a general rule, I tend to not take advice from the guy who 'failed', I can make a couple of guesses as to why you were involved in failed projects
Make all the guesses, rules and SIGHs you want; until you learn how money works they're not worth much.
Given the quick evolution of technology and the explosive growth in storage and computing resources, making an "up front investment" is about as clever as building an airport on a piece of land you don't own. By the time your 3-5 years of depreciation have run, your clever "up front" planning will be as accurate and relevant as an horoscope. Meanwhile, someone who opted to put IT infrastructure in the "services" column has paid exactly for what they have consumed and left the guessing game of capacity planning to the cloud vendor.
By the way, just the fact that you bring up "TCO" shows that you're playing bullshit bingo with bingo cards printed 15 years ago. Time to upgrade your frame of reference, pal.
Ok. As soon as John Oliver is arrested we can revisit this theory. Hopefully you won't mind if I don't hold my breath.
red people like you [...] Why don't you wait until you have some evidence either way before you start pointing fingers and shaking them?
[,,,] ]This is what your kind always claims
Reading this, it's difficult not to immediately think about pots and kettles.
So before you accuse people of pointing fingers without evidence, why don't you start by not doing it yourself?
Bill Maher has shifted to the left and embraced reality
Here's Bill Maher "reality":
Basically, they’re having a family and they’re keeping the mother in jail because she won’t conform to what society feels should be the perfect American family.
That quote is how Bill Maher reacted to a female teacher that was sent to prison for having "an affair" with her 12 years old student.
That wouldn't be a problem if people elected honest people to POTUS and Congress. As well as said people being backed by news organizations that are having a huge fallout of sexual harassment from not only it's CEO but several large name on air personalities like Fox.
It always amaze me how there's a double standard when it comes to sexual harassment stories. Every accusation against Trump or Fox News is automatically believed, but accusations against serial offenders like Bill Clinton or against people like Al Gore or Assange are "conspiracies".
I mean, the Clinton stuff is of epic proportions - not only the rapes but also the cover-up, from burning women's pets alive to getting them fired then investigated by the IRS for "driving a nice car while having no income" - and yet what freak people out is alleged unpleasant behaviors and comments from private citizens.
Don't get me wrong, I personally think Bill O'Reilly is a piece of shit and whether the accusations are true or not I'm delighted to see him shamed publicly. But really, the hypocrisy in those matters is just unbelievable.
backpedaling net neutrality at the behest of their new boss?
If you look at the actual situation instead of focusing on Trump, you'd realize that ISP have basically stopped investing in their network because there's too many restrictions (studies show a drop of 30-40% in investment per year since Title II). Yes, it's a beautiful dream of having private corporations foot the bill for online freedom but that's not how capitalism works. Look at how well making things equal worked for the USSR, or how it helped Venezuela when the governement ended up deciding how much flat screen TV should cost.
Pretty much every week people on Slashdot get their panties in a bunch over Comcast not bringing fiber to such or such neighborhood or Google pulling the plug on expansion plans for Google Fiber. Well that's the price to pay if you want to bask in the glorious warmth of net neutrality. Fire up your 300-baud modem and have at it.
If Chrome on Android would let me read web pages immediately I would be happy enough. It's so bad that the other day I went to the Play store to see if Edge was available for Android.
I guess we'll see at the next election. If they bring in Oprah or Meryl Streep to oppose Trump we'll know it's just a matter of time before we get President Kardashian in the Oval Office. Objectively, anything is now possible. Trump broke the glass floor.
I dare you to look up what they billed the taxpayer for the website and compare it to the workload it can handle. Then let's talk "perfectly acceptable".
I don't know the exact cost, but they actually took action to reduce their IT costs, as required by federal guidelines established under Obama:
https://www.fcc.gov/general/fe...
Basically they're moving all their stuff to the cloud. They already saved millions with that, you can get all the details in their budget review (which is public).
The Commission made a concerted effort to curb the escalating IT operation and maintenance
(O&M) costs back in FY 2014. Prior to FY 2014, the FCC faced ever-increasing costs in operating
and maintaining its aging legacy IT systems. To counter these escalating O&M costs, the FCC IT
team took the first bold step in early September 2015 by physically relocating over 200 different
legacy servers from the FCC’s headquarters in Washington, D.C. to a commercially hosted federalcertified
facility located in West Virginia. These servers contained almost 400 different program
applications. By physically relocating these servers to a commercially hosted provider, not only
will O&M costs be reduced, but it will also allow for improved resiliency and a shift of many legacy
applications to the cloud, similar to the Commission’s Consumer Help Desk.
In FY 2014, 86 percent of IT funding was utilized for O&M and only 14 percent was utilized for
development, modernization, and enhancements (DME). Those percentages are expected to change
to 49 percent O&M and 51 percent DME by the end of FY 2017. The savings that will be realized
on the O&M side will be redirected to delivering new capabilities.
https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_pub...
To put things in perspective: the entire FCC budget is 380 millions. They have 1800 employees, which already eats about half of that budget. Then there's buildings, power/heating/cooling, furniture, copiers, etc. They're not cheap, but I've worked on project in the private sector where more money that than was wasted on failed ERP initiatives.
You find them funny because your share their view. Go on Fox News and watch "Miller Time" with Dennis Miller. He's very intelligent and his humor is smart, but if you happen to be a liberal you won't like him. The thing is, for one Dennis Miller there's 20 Colbert.
What's really creepy is that once again, a majority of liberals take their news from a comedy show and a majority of conservatives take their news from the Twitter feed of a reality TV star turned President.
We're really heading into Idiocracy territory.
Remember when people used to call this phenomenon Slashdot Effect?
On a more serious note, is the Trump Administration now going to call Slashdot Effect an "attack," and if so, how is this not a sign of them ramping up the authoritarianism?
the FCC is not the same thing as the Trump administration. They are independent and can't have more than 3/5 of their commissioners coming from the same party, and they are nominated for terms longer than the president's.
Doesn't mean they are competent. But it's not Trump.
Those two things are unrelated. It's perfectly acceptable for a public agency to scale its system to a realistic workload, not for some fluke peak, especially since they're using a cloud provider (where you can run quite a bill).
The real scary thing is that they can't tell the difference between heavy load and a DDOS.
You are so incredibly naive that you would probably also believe Larry if he announced that he was removing all license fees for the Oracle DB.
No, you just jumped to the wrong conclusion. The point here is not that Oracle is honest or dishonest, the point is that their nefarious agenda has OBVIOUSLY nothing to do with selling database licenses to ISP, they're in it because the only segment with some growth in their revenue is the cloud stuff.
It's not enough to piss on companies, you kinda need to make sense too when you do it and that was sorely missing in the OP post.
Given that super-realistic Netflix check-signing scenario you envisioned, I can see how it would be hard to imagine or assess the actual possibilities.
Anyone who follows even remotely the tech industry knows that Oracle is trying to reinvent itself as a cloud player. Their position in this case is obviously linked to that, not to some retarded scheme to possibly sell fucking database licenses to some mysterious entity that would need it to milk customers.
It's clear that both Cisco and Oracle are fuckers. What's also clear is that people on this Net Neutrality topic are in the shoot first, think later mindset, as it's made quite obvious by those lame-ass database licensing scheme accusations.
Oracle is going to make a ton of money selling user tracking databases.
Really? Oracle master plan is to crush net neutrality so they can sell more database licenses to "track users"? What's next, Staples will jump in so they can sell more pens to Netflix who will sign a bunch of checks to ISP? How the fuck can people come up with such ridiculous theories is beyond me.
When Oracle talks about a "highly political hyperbolic battle that is removed from technical, economic, and consumer reality,” they appear to be spot on.
Apple is the most valuable private company in the world.
I think someone should call the SEC because lots of people have bought shares of that private company in the public market.
Yes, any company can fail, but the richest one still making the most money per quarter is the least likely to fail.
Did you look at the list before getting your panties in a bunch? All of those companies seemed like they were making shittons of money per quarter.
Apple owes more than 100 billions. Of their pile of cash, only 20 billions are available, the rest is stuck offshore and can't be used to acquire DIsney or anything else in the USA. I don't know what spreadsheet you use to make your investments planning but if it's telling you that Apple is a financially sound company, it's broken. If you want to do some speculation because you expect that other idiots will be willing to pay more for that stock down the road, fine; but don't pretend that it's a wise investment. Their market is saturated, the brand has lost its prestige, and the innovation is gone. You might as well invest in Big Tobbacco.
I recharge my watch every few years in 5 minutes by taking it to the jeweler at the supermarket. The watch it self is 24 years old and was a 21st birthday present from my Dad.
Your story sounds like a high school math exam question.
Were you one of the 3.5 million customers who purchased an Apple Watch in the first quarter of 2017? If so, how do you like Apple's approach to wearables?
Do we get a $25 iTunes gift card if we answer your marketing survey?
The cheating is partly an indication of just how popular that course has become.
So what you're implying is that "normal people" cheat more than CS students?
Why don't they give some of their iPhones to poor black children?
They already have iPhones. In many poor communities the smartphone is the only way to access internet, and it comes bundled with the carrier contract.
According to a study by the Pew research institute, when it comes to internet access, "12 percent of African-Americans and 13 percent of Latinos are smartphone-reliant, compared with 4 percent of whites."
... and that makes them hypocrites.
Can you blame them?
Yes, because Apple makes $400 on every iPhone they sell. Instead of adding every single one of those $400 to the pile of 200 billions idle dollars they have hidden in foreign countries, they could do things properly.
They have no problem building a $5 billion head office that they will tout as "green" but they can't be bothered with the environmental impact of their products. They are repugnant in a way that even greedy banksters will never approach.
Just so we're clear, are you an offended Apple fanboi or a garden-variety hate spewing liberal?