Actually, the real problem is that IT management is so impressed by the initial dollar savings that they are completely oblivious to the utter lack of quality in the work coming back from offshore. Our organization has outsourced about 2/3rds of its internal development to one of the largest companies in India (InfoSys). The product we receive back from them is consistently of poor quality, bug-ridden, and unmaintainable.
Unfortunately, upper management is still so pleased with the low hourly rates that they're not realizing that in the long term, they're paying for three times as many hours than would be necessary if the software were written correctly in the first place. I don't have much hope that they will come to their senses -- this has been going on for four years here now.
But you do (assuming you're a US citizen) reap the benefits of the US government as a whole. Relatively low gas prices (look at the UK for example), relatively low income tax, various freedoms. By continuing to live here, by your own logic, you're undermining any moral stand you might have against the current administration.
My point, of course, is that this is/not/ a logical assumption -- AND that it doesn't make any more sense than saying, "Well, you work for MS, therefore your position against XYZ is weakened."
Your remaining points:
I'm not talking about being a martyr. I understand needing to pay the bills. I am saying, however, that your credentials work against your rhetorical stance. You benefit from MS's DRM practices. You might not like them, but you are reaping the rewards.
that's the one I was answering directly
"IBM, Oracle, Intel, AMD, Sony, the rest of corporate america?"..."Everybody's doing it, so why can't I?" is not an acceptable answer from someone who professes integrity.
Because I don't know for sure that is what he was saying, I didn't want to comment on it -- personally, I don't think that was his intent.
"If you can fight the good fight within Microsoft, that's great. More power to you! However, unless and until that actually works, you are going to be judged by the company you keep. "
This is a valid point, to an extent. However, it no longer holds true when he steps forward and says that he has opinions on which he disagrees with his employer.
I'm not talking about being a martyr. I understand needing to pay the bills. I am saying, however, that your credentials work against your rhetorical stance. You benefit from MS's DRM practices. You might not like them, but you are reaping the rewards.
Isn't this comparable to saying, "Well, you live in the United States, so your position against the current government is essentially invalid where it counts." ?
Why would you insist on "scaling" applications when you could just set the priority(win)/nice(*nix) level lower? (i.e., higher nice value in linux, lower priority setting in windows). That way, it will always yield to every other system that needs to use the CPU. (And nevermind the belief that a process can use only 'part' of a single-core CPU)
Sometimes, it takes a certain attitude to impart a particular lesson on someone. Is it immature of a parent to tell their child to grow up when the child exhibits bad behavior? I don't think so.
That is also a valid point, but it seems to support my case more than yours. If you consider NYL as the "parent" telling the "child" to grow up for exibiting bad behavior... I'm not trying to be insulting with that (I realize it could seem that way), but it seems to fit a lot better than what I think you're saying -- that your insults/attitude was the equivalent of telling the child to "grow up". (Aside: I would hope a parent wouldn't tell their six-year-old to grow up... teenagers, on the other hand, are a different story.)
Respect is earned, not given, and the post was aimed at someone who had it at first and lost it over time due to a lousy attitude and lack of respect toward questioners.,
My philosophy is somewhat different -- I'll give everyone a minimum of respect until they do something that indicates they don't deserve it.
In this case, I didn't see any lack of respect, at least not until the response to your post. While I admit his initial response to the question at hand was a bit flippant, it was also a valid point -- in law, you can't make assumptions. A poorly worded phrase can cost millions.
... who didn't get anything from that? Who needs lawyers, I can answer every question with a synonym for "depends" myself. I realize, the law is incredibly complicated (i'm a criminal justice student myself), but come on - "I don't know what MP3 files you are talking about, how do you know you were entitled to make those copies legally?" - well fuck i don't know, was I? Stop answering questions with questions and i'll stop talking shit about lawyers.
Then...
His attitude of answering questions he doesn't like with flippant "grow up" remarks makes him rude to mine. This guy has no sense of manners, grammar, or proper respect of others in a discussion.
You make a post that's deliberately insulting and belittling, and you expect someone to react as if you made an intelligent, rational point? If you're not going to show a modicum of respect for someone you're trying to engage in coversation with, why on earth do you expect them to show respect for you? To quote: "grow up".
Perhaps it's just those you associate with? That came out wrong... what I mean to say is that I don't know/anyone/ who was surprised by the flop that was Segway; similarly, I've not really heard of anyone not involved in marketing, production , or paid analytics reports who was surprised either.
Like I said before, use the WPA option. That's the best one, since it changes its encryption algorithm dynamically, making it much harder to break. Changing the passkey every month or so should make it reasonably safe.
There are two reasons that approved MAC addresses by themselves aren't sufficient. First, a MAC address can also be easily spoofed. So if someone is monitoring traffic, they pick up your valid MAC address, then use it themselves. (I'm oversimplifying a little, but htat's the basic scenario.) Second, while it may help deter someone from actively using your connection, it won't do anything to prevent monitoring of traffic going across your wireless network -- so sensitive or personal information could be picked up. Again, this is less likely a concern, but it is possible.
Using their wireless equipment to scan what's being sent over yours. Once they have determined you key, they can do that without joining your network -- so MAC blocking won't prevent. Basically provides a wide-open door to anyone snooping your network.
Disparage defined: to depreciate by indirect means (as invidious comparison) : speak slightingly about. In other words, to be insulting -- in this case through tone and content. It's perfectly possible to tell someone they're wrong without being insulting about it -- it troubles me that you don't yet realize this.
But that aside... you still haven't answered my question.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, the real problem is that IT management is so impressed by the initial dollar savings that they are completely oblivious to the utter lack of quality in the work coming back from offshore. Our organization has outsourced about 2/3rds of its internal development to one of the largest companies in India (InfoSys). The product we receive back from them is consistently of poor quality, bug-ridden, and unmaintainable.
Unfortunately, upper management is still so pleased with the low hourly rates that they're not realizing that in the long term, they're paying for three times as many hours than would be necessary if the software were written correctly in the first place. I don't have much hope that they will come to their senses -- this has been going on for four years here now.
But you do (assuming you're a US citizen) reap the benefits of the US government as a whole. Relatively low gas prices (look at the UK for example), relatively low income tax, various freedoms. By continuing to live here, by your own logic, you're undermining any moral stand you might have against the current administration.
My point, of course, is that this is /not/ a logical assumption -- AND that it doesn't make any more sense than saying, "Well, you work for MS, therefore your position against XYZ is weakened."
Your remaining points:
I'm not talking about being a martyr. I understand needing to pay the bills. I am saying, however, that your credentials work against your rhetorical stance. You benefit from MS's DRM practices. You might not like them, but you are reaping the rewards.
that's the one I was answering directly"IBM, Oracle, Intel, AMD, Sony, the rest of corporate america?"..."Everybody's doing it, so why can't I?" is not an acceptable answer from someone who professes integrity.
Because I don't know for sure that is what he was saying, I didn't want to comment on it -- personally, I don't think that was his intent.
"If you can fight the good fight within Microsoft, that's great. More power to you! However, unless and until that actually works, you are going to be judged by the company you keep. "
This is a valid point, to an extent. However, it no longer holds true when he steps forward and says that he has opinions on which he disagrees with his employer.I'm not talking about being a martyr. I understand needing to pay the bills. I am saying, however, that your credentials work against your rhetorical stance. You benefit from MS's DRM practices. You might not like them, but you are reaping the rewards.
Isn't this comparable to saying, "Well, you live in the United States, so your position against the current government is essentially invalid where it counts." ?Valid points; I had actually missed that part of your first post.
Why would you insist on "scaling" applications when you could just set the priority(win)/nice(*nix) level lower? (i.e., higher nice value in linux, lower priority setting in windows). That way, it will always yield to every other system that needs to use the CPU. (And nevermind the belief that a process can use only 'part' of a single-core CPU)
Sometimes, it takes a certain attitude to impart a particular lesson on someone. Is it immature of a parent to tell their child to grow up when the child exhibits bad behavior? I don't think so.
That is also a valid point, but it seems to support my case more than yours. If you consider NYL as the "parent" telling the "child" to grow up for exibiting bad behavior... I'm not trying to be insulting with that (I realize it could seem that way), but it seems to fit a lot better than what I think you're saying -- that your insults/attitude was the equivalent of telling the child to "grow up". (Aside: I would hope a parent wouldn't tell their six-year-old to grow up... teenagers, on the other hand, are a different story.)Respect is earned, not given, and the post was aimed at someone who had it at first and lost it over time due to a lousy attitude and lack of respect toward questioners.,
My philosophy is somewhat different -- I'll give everyone a minimum of respect until they do something that indicates they don't deserve it.
In this case, I didn't see any lack of respect, at least not until the response to your post. While I admit his initial response to the question at hand was a bit flippant, it was also a valid point -- in law, you can't make assumptions. A poorly worded phrase can cost millions.
... who didn't get anything from that? Who needs lawyers, I can answer every question with a synonym for "depends" myself. I realize, the law is incredibly complicated (i'm a criminal justice student myself), but come on - "I don't know what MP3 files you are talking about, how do you know you were entitled to make those copies legally?" - well fuck i don't know, was I? Stop answering questions with questions and i'll stop talking shit about lawyers.
Then...His attitude of answering questions he doesn't like with flippant "grow up" remarks makes him rude to mine. This guy has no sense of manners, grammar, or proper respect of others in a discussion.
You make a post that's deliberately insulting and belittling, and you expect someone to react as if you made an intelligent, rational point? If you're not going to show a modicum of respect for someone you're trying to engage in coversation with, why on earth do you expect them to show respect for you? To quote: "grow up".
http://interviews.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=196 480&cid=16106142
It's a link to NewYorkLawyer's comment in this same conversation, he provides an extensive list. (No, this is not karma whoring. Answering a question just for the sake of answering it. Imagine that.)
Spewing obscenities again, are we?
"It's funny. Laugh."
Perhaps it's just those you associate with? That came out wrong... what I mean to say is that I don't know /anyone/ who was surprised by the flop that was Segway; similarly, I've not really heard of anyone not involved in marketing, production , or paid analytics reports who was surprised either.
Shall I assume you ran out of replies?
No.
Oh. Shit.
Yea, but most people dont run two hair-dryers 24/7
You haven't met my wife.
There are two reasons that approved MAC addresses by themselves aren't sufficient. First, a MAC address can also be easily spoofed. So if someone is monitoring traffic, they pick up your valid MAC address, then use it themselves. (I'm oversimplifying a little, but htat's the basic scenario.) Second, while it may help deter someone from actively using your connection, it won't do anything to prevent monitoring of traffic going across your wireless network -- so sensitive or personal information could be picked up. Again, this is less likely a concern, but it is possible.
which would fit right in with My Little Pony figures all around it.
OMG PONIEZ!!!!!!1!!1
Using their wireless equipment to scan what's being sent over yours. Once they have determined you key, they can do that without joining your network -- so MAC blocking won't prevent. Basically provides a wide-open door to anyone snooping your network.
Disparage defined: to depreciate by indirect means (as invidious comparison) : speak slightingly about. In other words, to be insulting -- in this case through tone and content. It's perfectly possible to tell someone they're wrong without being insulting about it -- it troubles me that you don't yet realize this.
But that aside... you still haven't answered my question.
Any legitimate use for access to sockets at that level?
Correction; "sarcastic". And by implication, disparaging. As to which part, the whole thing. It wasn't a very long remark.
Also, nice try at dodging the question I asked.
Fair enough; at what level would you have them disabled? OS? ISP?
So why didn't you say that in the first place, instead of making a disparaging remark?
Disabling raw sockets... may help too.
Any socket is a raw socket, e.g., just because port 80 is the standard port for http doesn't mean I have to use http over it.
Yes, how about that. Get back to me when you are naked, living in the forest, gathering fruits and berries for food.
Way to have a rational, logical discussion. I'm impressed.