Given the number of invitations and pre-approved credit card forms
I get in the post, it would be incredibly easy just to set up a
"throwaway" CC account. Use it once for a ticket (same for an email account),
pay the balance off in full - maybe in cash at the bank if you're really
paranoid - and never use it again.
Repeat as necessary for each transatlantic trip, I'm sure I'll run out of the
will to visit the USA before I run out of credit card invites.
How can I actually get them to buy into logging calls, and not 'forget' or be 'too busy' to log things properly?
There's a time to be a buddy, and there's a time to be a boss.
That's is the best advice you'll ever get
... and part of your job is to motivate your people. Otherwise
(sadly) you may find that you're the first one to get chopped. While
it's nice to have a small team that all get on together and to have
your subordinates like you, don't let this become the dominant feature
of your team. Once you get replaced, the new boss will likely have learned
from your "mistake" and be a right hard-@ss.
As Machiavelli said: "It's better to be feared than loved, if you can't be both"
That's a very fine sentiment my friend. But just wait until you get
rejected from a plum job because of something you posted after a
couple of beers several years before (and had probably forgotten
about).
On the upside, I can see a whole new industry (apart from blackmail)
emerging from the need for individuals with aspirations to have their
murky/ill-considered online postings tidied up or "lost"
... and some other countries too.
It does work quite well in circumstances where ADSL can't/won't go.
The experience of users in the "campo" (countryside) varies as some
nodes can get choked - where capacity hasn't kept up with demand.
As others have pointed out, its success depends totally on getting the
price and investment right.
.... was the name of a very funny tv series during the 80s. Its main
characters were a clueless minister of state and his conniving private
secretary.
This answer "...it's hard to see why...." is a line right out of this
show. It doesn't say that the information is worthless, nor
does it criticise e-passports for being insecure. Instead it says that
the spokesman found something (irrelevant) hard to imagine. That's something
completely different.
A masterpiece of misdirection, IMHO and just illustrates how hard it is to
get a straight answer out of the b@$+@%ds
This article is really just about good (in the authors opinion) TTY shell
usage. There's more to Unix than just its shell
(plus he didn't mention
my favourite shortcut: shell history)
How about being more inclusive and expanding this to deal with security
features (surely the single biggest benefit?) and the ease of working on
remote boxes?
The biggest problem with this is the way lazy exec's just reply to all
for every comment they make. If a request for info is sent out to (say) 20
people, it's very possible that all 20 recipients will get all the traffic
on this subject - whether it's "sorry I don't know" or "don't bother, we're
closing that location" or anything in between.
You can't back security into an organisation. Either the individuals are
prepared to put up with the extra work it needs, or they aren't. Without
some effort from everyone, your level of security drops to that of the
weakest link (usually the boss)
It's like these "robotic" vacuum cleaners you occasionally see on
TV gadget shows. When you actually look into it, they're junk.
Will it clean the stairs? "Well, no. It can't climb stairs" (so it can
only do half the house anyway).
Can it remove cobwebs, like a normal vacuum? "No it can't reach above floor height".
Can it empty itself, when the dust bag fills up? "Errr, no. can't do that either".
So what we really get for all this technology is a bunch of gizmos that
cost a fortune, do half a job and you then have to buy conventional
appliances to finish off the work.
In the future instead of having labour saving devices, we'll be spending all
our leisure time maintaining all the labour saving devices.
Personally I think bio-tech is the answer. How about selectively breeding
shaggy dogs who's fur contains furniture polish. They can wax the floor while
they play. Or genetically modifying a gecko to eat dust and excrete (warm)
coffee? Better yet, silkworms that only feed on the dirt in clothes and can
spin yarn that repairs them at the same time.
moving parts? power and reliability
on
A Single Pixel Camera
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
OK the mirrors are micro-mirrors, but I still have concerns with the
complexity of this thing. It seems to be counter to the trend of making
operations execute in parallel, rather than serially as they are often
originally developed.I can see that it may carve a specialised niche
for itself, but it doesn't look like it could take over the "happy snaps"
market.
With all the moving parts, how much power does this array consume? What
happens if one of the actuators sticks: do you get dead pixel effects?
So what would you like the regulators to do?
write loads of flowery prose instead of doing their job, which is to
regulate.
Taking your views to their logical extreme, no-one would do anything
that was "their job", just in case someone accused them of doing it.
The connection to someone using that defence
to justify an illegal or immoral act is completely bogus. Here the regulators
are upholding the morals/laws of the society they represent.
should a government-chosen domain registry be allowed to enforce their own moral code on the public?"
The Irish broadcast regulator stop certain typs of programme from being
aired. The advertising regulators prevent distasteful ads. from being published.
Your position is no different. They're enforcing public policy or generally accepted principles of morality. If you don't like that,
well, you can appeal or run for public office and then change the rules
to whatever you can persuade people to accept.
Finally, don't you think that if this domain name was registrable, someone
would have got there before you? The only reason it's "available" is because
others have run into the regulations before you.
yes, it is a lot - in fact it's quite disgraceful.
The only reason people are even considering Vista (given this level
of failure) is that we have become so used to PCs crashing that we're
blind to it.
Imagine if your TV switched itself off and took a minute or two to
come back as often as your computer crashes. You'd send it back and
demand a proper one - that worked.
I'm aware of all the arguments about 3rd party software/drivers etc.
being the real cause. That's as maybe, but if the Vista architecture was
designed to be robust and tolerant to these faults, then the problems
we see just wouldn't arise. After all, it's not like MS can say that
faulty drivers are a new problem
OK, we've heard from the report that the Chinese have tried to
blind a satellite. Until we can actually see the resulting images - which
will simply never happen, how can we or the chinese know that they've
succeeded in stopping photos being taken.
If I was in the US spying game and I know that someone was trying to blind
my satellites, I'd say "Oh no, you've stopped me photographing your secret
installations" even if the attempts were unsuccessful. That way the target
thinks they've stopped the spy satellites, whereas in practice, the lasers
may be completely ineffectual.
Until the Chinese spies can get hold of genuine, spoiled, satellite photos
(that weren't staged/planted) they cannot be sure they have suceeded.
Overseas types are pretty damned creative with your numbers
So what are you saying? American fraudsters are dumb?
Maybe someone should start a campaign to get them up to the same level of
skill as those from other countries. Or is this more of a reflection of the
level of education.
Anyone going to start offering college courses in electronic fraud.
If you do, don't accept any form of payment except cash.
OK, I'm fine with the idea of protecting people's water supply.
But to say this is part of the fight against terrorism frankly, is
ridiculous.
ISTM that each time "terrorism" is included as a reason to improve public safety, it's just assisting the terrorist agenda by keeping them inthe news
and instilling fear where it didn't previously exist.
Better to celebrate the improvements that progress brings, rather than trying
to keep everyone cowering in fear with cheap, sensationalist news copy.
I got a new phone recently that came with a 1GB microSD card the size
of a fingernail. It made me think back about 15 years to when 1GB hard disks
were new. SCSI interface, 3.5 inch, high power consumption, hot, noisy and cost a thousand quid,
c.f. 18 for the phone memory.
Maybe if (a big if, I know) this technology does actually deliver,
we may see the same kind of tech. leap in the next 15 years.
By then the biggest problem would be losing - literally - all your data.
That's quite a good point: what does it mean to have a friend?
from a child's point of view, it's just someone to hang with. The
quality of the friendship (i.e. what do they share) online is fairly
low.
One thing about growing up is that the quality of friendship changes. So
people you may have counted as friends as a child are now merely
neighbours, or colleagues, or co-irkers.
The study needs to be able to take this into account if it's to be relevant.
It also needs to have an objective measurement of the attributes it is claiming.
When we get to the point that these things can be measured, we're halfway
towards getting some proper research done.
So we have 2 studies, one shows one effect and the other shows the
opposite.
There's simply no basis for drawing conclusions here. while it's quite
entertaining to talk about this, it would be a big mistake to
actually think that either of these studies mean anything.
I'm pretty sure that if you did a few more studies, you could get some
that confirm and some that refute the idea that internet use leads to/cure
social isolation.
To quote a wise man:
"The only possible conclusion the social sciences can draw is: some do, some don't."
.... is always a bad idea. This article is about revenue and sales volumes.
What do we know about the majority of Linux installations?
Right, it's downloaded for free, or purchased at low cost by inividuals.
These "facts" are completely invisible to the enterprise/financial people
who were the drivers for this article.
Linux will be alive and well by the end of the decade (or in 3 years time).
Nothing much will have changed, except more apps will run across all platforms.
You never know, Apple's UNIX may still be there, too.
... the people who allegedly tried to murder thousands...
Let's not forget here folks, no-one's been found guilty of anything.
Over here (UK) that word has been used consistently about the suspects
and accusations in this case. You can't go around calling people terrorists
just becasue they've been arrested. In the UK only 2% of people arrested
for alleged terrorist acts have ever been found guilty of anything at all.
Often charges that are brought come about from evidence of other, non-terror related, crimes that the police found during their searches.
That means that the other 98% could sue a publication/TV unless that
qualifier is included pretty much everywhere.
Slashdot Mirror
Repeat as necessary for each transatlantic trip, I'm sure I'll run out of the will to visit the USA before I run out of credit card invites.
There's a time to be a buddy, and there's a time to be a boss.
That's is the best advice you'll ever get
As Machiavelli said: "It's better to be feared than loved, if you can't be both"
That's a very fine sentiment my friend. But just wait until you get rejected from a plum job because of something you posted after a couple of beers several years before (and had probably forgotten about).
On the upside, I can see a whole new industry (apart from blackmail) emerging from the need for individuals with aspirations to have their murky/ill-considered online postings tidied up or "lost"
This answer "...it's hard to see why...." is a line right out of this show. It doesn't say that the information is worthless, nor does it criticise e-passports for being insecure. Instead it says that the spokesman found something (irrelevant) hard to imagine. That's something completely different.
A masterpiece of misdirection, IMHO and just illustrates how hard it is to get a straight answer out of the b@$+@%ds
(plus he didn't mention my favourite shortcut: shell history)
How about being more inclusive and expanding this to deal with security features (surely the single biggest benefit?) and the ease of working on remote boxes?
apparently he's upset about something to do with online gaming
You can't back security into an organisation. Either the individuals are prepared to put up with the extra work it needs, or they aren't. Without some effort from everyone, your level of security drops to that of the weakest link (usually the boss)
Will it clean the stairs? "Well, no. It can't climb stairs" (so it can only do half the house anyway).
Can it remove cobwebs, like a normal vacuum? "No it can't reach above floor height".
Can it empty itself, when the dust bag fills up? "Errr, no. can't do that either".
So what we really get for all this technology is a bunch of gizmos that cost a fortune, do half a job and you then have to buy conventional appliances to finish off the work.
In the future instead of having labour saving devices, we'll be spending all our leisure time maintaining all the labour saving devices.
Personally I think bio-tech is the answer. How about selectively breeding shaggy dogs who's fur contains furniture polish. They can wax the floor while they play. Or genetically modifying a gecko to eat dust and excrete (warm) coffee? Better yet, silkworms that only feed on the dirt in clothes and can spin yarn that repairs them at the same time.
With all the moving parts, how much power does this array consume? What happens if one of the actuators sticks: do you get dead pixel effects?
write loads of flowery prose instead of doing their job, which is to regulate.
Taking your views to their logical extreme, no-one would do anything that was "their job", just in case someone accused them of doing it.
The connection to someone using that defence to justify an illegal or immoral act is completely bogus. Here the regulators are upholding the morals/laws of the society they represent.
The Irish broadcast regulator stop certain typs of programme from being aired. The advertising regulators prevent distasteful ads. from being published.
Your position is no different. They're enforcing public policy or generally accepted principles of morality. If you don't like that, well, you can appeal or run for public office and then change the rules to whatever you can persuade people to accept.
Finally, don't you think that if this domain name was registrable, someone would have got there before you? The only reason it's "available" is because others have run into the regulations before you.
The only reason people are even considering Vista (given this level of failure) is that we have become so used to PCs crashing that we're blind to it.
Imagine if your TV switched itself off and took a minute or two to come back as often as your computer crashes. You'd send it back and demand a proper one - that worked.
I'm aware of all the arguments about 3rd party software/drivers etc. being the real cause. That's as maybe, but if the Vista architecture was designed to be robust and tolerant to these faults, then the problems we see just wouldn't arise. After all, it's not like MS can say that faulty drivers are a new problem
probably not ... as the airport lounge has glass walls
If I was in the US spying game and I know that someone was trying to blind my satellites, I'd say "Oh no, you've stopped me photographing your secret installations" even if the attempts were unsuccessful. That way the target thinks they've stopped the spy satellites, whereas in practice, the lasers may be completely ineffectual.
Until the Chinese spies can get hold of genuine, spoiled, satellite photos (that weren't staged/planted) they cannot be sure they have suceeded.
So what are you saying? American fraudsters are dumb?
Maybe someone should start a campaign to get them up to the same level of skill as those from other countries. Or is this more of a reflection of the level of education.
Anyone going to start offering college courses in electronic fraud. If you do, don't accept any form of payment except cash.
ISTM that each time "terrorism" is included as a reason to improve public safety, it's just assisting the terrorist agenda by keeping them inthe news and instilling fear where it didn't previously exist.
Better to celebrate the improvements that progress brings, rather than trying to keep everyone cowering in fear with cheap, sensationalist news copy.
c.f. 18 for the phone memory.
Maybe if (a big if, I know) this technology does actually deliver, we may see the same kind of tech. leap in the next 15 years.
By then the biggest problem would be losing - literally - all your data.
That's progress.
What's productivity got to do with innovation?
One's quantity and the other's quality.
Read the article that /. cites. It's to do with "exciting" innovations,
not the number of papers published or the number of patents filed.
The objectionable nature of the review is that it excludes large segments of the population based on an arbitrary property of the possible candidates.
Take a moment to substitute the "under 35" exclusion for other forms of discrimination and you'll see just how unenlightened this really is.
This kind of publicity is insidious. It lays the idea in peoples' minds that innovators can only be young.
Metering a houshold's rubbish is no different from metering it's water or power consumption (except that it's going the other direction).
If it makes people more aware of the amount of stuff they waste then it can only be a good thing.
If you're worried about having your garbage monitored, then too bad ...
it's already been recorded when you bought it with a credit/debit card.
Of course the totally paranoid will just toss their junk in someone else's bin
That's quite a good point: what does it mean to have a friend?
from a child's point of view, it's just someone to hang with. The quality of the friendship (i.e. what do they share) online is fairly low.
One thing about growing up is that the quality of friendship changes. So people you may have counted as friends as a child are now merely neighbours, or colleagues, or co-irkers.
The study needs to be able to take this into account if it's to be relevant. It also needs to have an objective measurement of the attributes it is claiming.
When we get to the point that these things can be measured, we're halfway towards getting some proper research done.
There's simply no basis for drawing conclusions here. while it's quite entertaining to talk about this, it would be a big mistake to actually think that either of these studies mean anything.
I'm pretty sure that if you did a few more studies, you could get some that confirm and some that refute the idea that internet use leads to/cure social isolation.
To quote a wise man:
"The only possible conclusion the social sciences can draw is: some do, some don't."
- Ernest Rutherford
What do we know about the majority of Linux installations?
Right, it's downloaded for free, or purchased at low cost by inividuals. These "facts" are completely invisible to the enterprise/financial people who were the drivers for this article.
Linux will be alive and well by the end of the decade (or in 3 years time). Nothing much will have changed, except more apps will run across all platforms.
You never know, Apple's UNIX may still be there, too.
Let's not forget here folks, no-one's been found guilty of anything.
Over here (UK) that word has been used consistently about the suspects and accusations in this case. You can't go around calling people terrorists just becasue they've been arrested. In the UK only 2% of people arrested for alleged terrorist acts have ever been found guilty of anything at all.
Often charges that are brought come about from evidence of other, non-terror related, crimes that the police found during their searches.
That means that the other 98% could sue a publication/TV unless that qualifier is included pretty much everywhere.