Or email the file to yourself using encryption or obfuscation
Or print the thing out
Or call someone up and tell them the info over the phone
The only real defense against employee theft is restricting access to sensitive data
Agreed. There are certain people within a company with the access to take everything down, generally upper management and officers. The company is obligated to trust them. That having been said, if it wasn't for them the company wouldn't exist so it's even steven. If people who aren't in a position of authority can access information like this using an MP3 player, then mistakes have been made.
The reason they call it a hypervisor is just that, its a step above a supervisory process. On VT enabled platforms (The new P4's / AMD's) you really start to see what xen can do without the bottlenecks of processor architecture.
I would think your bottlenecks would be constant context switches on your proc, cache misses on your virtual memory and seeks within your RAID (at the "hypervisor" level). No matter how good your top-level kernel delegates, it's still a level of indirection before control is passed to the kernels within your virtual machines (who obviously do their own prioritization). If you're running a cluster within a box, this constant delegating and shuffling of data from disparate elements to disparate kernels with disparate priorities would require constant and massive data shifts within the host machine and bring said box to a crawl, wouldn't it?
If this isn't a sign of bias, I don't know what is.
Just making sure I understand the argument:
Google is better than Yahoo/Microsoft
Google censors, just like Yahoo/Microsoft
Google is still better than Yahoo/Microsoft because people are singling Google out
Everyone knows how Yahoo/Microsoft do business. Google wouldn't be getting slammed unless they were so insistent they were above it all.
Google doesn't want to censor? Easy solution. Don't. They say that they must, because it will cost them market share in an emerging market? Congratulations, Google, you're sacrificing morality for the bottom line, just like Microsoft/Yahoo. You can gussy it up all you want but that's what it is.
There's nothing new about a company getting gritty for what's in the best interests of its bottom line, particularly a company like Google, who is now doing business with entities like governments and large corporations, which are notoriously iffy on the moral front. That's the nature of the beast. Just don't shove this "do no evil" crap down our throats because it's no longer true. Google's not evil, not yet, but the bloom is definitely off the rose.
I think the majority of Westerners are confused by how there aren't riots when someone blows themselves up in the name of a prophet, but when when they make cartoons about a prophet then all hell breaks loose.
What country do you live in? In mine, people run around waving flags and cheering as we kill people for oil, while going completely apeshit when Janet Jackson's boob pops out during the Super Bowl.
The United States in its current form is a fundamentalist country. We have a president doing missionary work in China. There's a movement to replace science with scripture. And they're not allowed to use the word "ass" on TNT anymore lest it reach virgin ears.
Haven't we been over this? Apple sells a computing experience.
You mean like the Solaris computing experience? Ask Sun how that worked out. Really, you make exactly the same arguments as those zealots used to use. And ultimately, the company will go *poof* for the same reason. All it's going to take is one truly good Windows release, like all it took was one truly good server OS (Linux) to come out, and Mac will tank like Sun did. Fortunately for Apple, that hasn't happened yet.
The reason Apple came down on these websites is that Apple makes their margins off of reselling hardware. They are a hardware monopoly, just like Sun used to be. If someone were to start distributing a version of OSX that ran on x86 , that would be a bad thing for their bottom line.
So why are we looking for life on planets we won't be able to get data back after a generation later?
I hate to break it to you, but the world will go on after you die. There will be people just as bright and interested in things like this as you are (or aren't).
Astroscience is about advancing the species, not the nation, not the corporation, not the individual, but humanity itself. In space are the answers to all of our questions (origins of life, divinity or lack thereof, the nature of sentience, possible existence of other dimensions, the relative success of our species and planet compared to other species and planets). We are as ignorant about such things as we were about electricity not too long ago. Because there are those who would prefer we stay that way, for sake of the belief we are somehow the center and culmination of all universal existence (how absurd!), it's necessary for those who know better to push these projects forward even though the results won't be present until long after we're dead.
Broadcast TV over IP probably isn't what you want. Data networks are a little too flaky for that, though not by much. 100% uptime is all that's considered acceptable with TV. Cable companies can't afford any downtime lest people be deprived of their brainwashing, erm, programming.
PPV movies, TV shows and the like make better sense over IP because they can be ordered, queued and displayed once sufficient buffering has taken place. It's odd that cable companies would allow such a thing to take place, as they currently are the only player in the PPV market. Quite possibly cable modem users will be throttled to telco network destinations (assuming Tivo partners with a telco company) the way telcos are planning to throttle Google.
Google specifically states that they will use their information for their own internal purposes to improve searches and such. They specifically state that they will not hand out that information to 3rd party.
When you use adwords, Google provides a summary of the number of times the phrase you're targeting has been queried in the previous n days to provide an estimate of how many clicks you can expect. So if you wanted the phrase "Osama Bin Laden" to point to your ad, you would see how many times people have searched for that term (and how many times they clicked through). Obviously they don't show you who searched for that term, but the information for a specific search term isn't that hard to come by.
This makes it seem like either the government is asking for more than they're letting on or Google is grandstanding.
If you really like MS though, why not wait for Windows Vista "98" when they iron out the kinks. (OS X had 'em too early on).
Cool, let me run out and buy a $2500 laptop so I can run BSD with a fancy Window manager and join a user base of pretentious wire-rimmed freaks. Maybe if you guys stopped patting each other on the back long enough, you'd notice you got jerked over on hardware.
My ex loved Macs. Bought one of those cube things. What junk.
Um honey, that thing's a piece of crap and your OS crashes constantly.
Yes, but it's so pretty.
Exactly. Style over substance. You knock yourself out. Just don't spill your latte on the keyboard as you tuck your earbuds in.
Tell them what you want. Then impress them with your skill set. If you can prove to them that you deserve what you want and, most importantly, no one with a similar or better skill set happens to be available for a lower price, you'll get it.
Any mid-to-large sized company isn't going to be broken by an IT salary. If you state politely and firmly that this is what you want and you won't accept any less, than the decision lies with them. If you don't state that up front, they'll assume there's some flexibility.
This assumes you know what you want. Many people I've interviewed don't.
The companies I've had the most trouble with are HR-driven companies. These are companies where compensation and hiring decisions come from HR. The financial industry in New York is a good example. An HR person can't tell who is talented and who isn't. All they have to go on is years of experience. The worst is when they go to those God-awful websites which say "this is how much a network administrator with 5 years of experience should make." When you tell them they're about 40% low, they'll tell you "thank you very much, goodbye."
In the Bay Area, most hiring decisions are made by the department head. This makes the most sense, as they are the only ones who can decrypt our skill set. They know how much someone who is really good is worth and, more importantly, how useless someone who isn't very good can be. Hopefully the company you're interested in works like that.
That's an interesting idea, but how are you going to talk to Japan, Europe, the other side of the country? Who is going to fork down the $$$ for a private line crossing those geographical extremitites? Those are serious bank.
Are you going to be routing other people's traffic in your network? Is someone else going to route yours? You're going to have to unless you want to just network with people in wireless range. What if they abuse it? What if they start distributing Warez or Pr0n or MP3z or episodes of Saved By The Bell and choke down all your resources? What if they start selling snake oil and angry consumers start pounding on your door? What if they hack the NSA and men in sunglasses start pounding at your door? What if your network becomes so popular you need to go to routing protocol but half the people on your network haven't a clue how to do it properly and routinely screw the entire thing up? What if some guy somewhere keeps sniffing packets and you find various charges on your credit card bill each month you didn't make? These are problems you don't want but other people have assumed.
The Tier 1 networks our packets flow over, where these rhetorical envelopes could be steamed open, are incredibly complicated beasts maintained by some of the more intelligent people in our industry. The human obstacles are equally significant. While I wouldn't nominate any Tier 1 for a Nobel Peace Prize, they do a terrific job from a certain point of view and there wouldn't be an Internet without them.
This kind of statistical propoganda is ludicrous. It just goes to show you... um... um... what was I saying? What were we talking about? Where am I? Who are you?
That quiz is crap. You can't tell a phishing email from a regular email just by looking at it because phishers (?) take a legitimate email and doctor it slightly.
The only way to tell a phishing email from a regular email is to examine the link that points to "Give Me Your Information."
Weak kneed leaders in the U.S. have been totally 100% cowed by irrational environmental types who do not use any of this data or statistical evidence or engineering facts to oppose anything but "green".
Been to Chernobyl lately? Try walking around without a radiation suit and when you get back home, you can mutter to yourself about "irrational environment types" as you count your tumors. Hey look! I just got another one on my nuts!
There is no panacea. Our societies are going to regress for lack of forward-thinking by people in power (and those who put them in power).
A competent hypnotist I know says 'addictive' things are the ones where you die if it's taken away, or at least get some serious withdrawal symptoms.
A competent Unix systems administrator I know thinks hypnotism is nothing but a parlor trick and being able to make people cluck like chickens in front of drunken college students hardly qualifies one to make definitive judgments about what addiction is or isn't.
Welcome to the Boo Radley club. Only requirement for membership is an insistence on self-determination, as opposed to what other people deem is "right for you."
Prepare yourself for a life of being branded unhealthy, addicted, insane and/or dangerous.
I've been in love with them and their "Don't be evil" thing
In love? Come on. They're a company. They made a good search engine, some good web apps and such, but they are profit motivated.
"Don't be evil" has changed from a loosely-defined guiding principle to a justification for doing whatever they think is right. If they don't think it's evil, then that's all that matters. I strongly doubt in their early days they would have believed you if you told them the kind of crap they're doing nowadays. Today, they just say "Hey, we're the cool company that says don't be evil."
If the only thing stopping them is something as ambiguous as "good" and "evil", then you can expect them to become increasingly corrupt, especially with their stock price starting to dip and some extraordinarily powerful investors starting to lean on them to do what makes the most sense financially, as opposed to morally.
In essense signed certs are only supposed to protect from a man-in-the-middle attack, not someone being fooled into going to a similarly named website.
Is there anything more mythical than a man-in-the-middle attack? It's the one attack everyone seems to know the name of (it is a nifty name) yet no one seems to understand. I still haven't met anyone who has pulled one off. A certificate, self-signed or signed by a CA, has nothing to do with it... it's the underlying encryption algorithm that makes it impossible to modify packets on the fly and act as a intermediary for a conversation.
Since I'm a Free market capitalist republican with Libertarian tendancies
Oh no! A dreaded Fumcrult! Lock up your daughters! He might liberate them or oppress them or sell them for a few rubles or something. We're not quite sure.
Could you have any more affiliations? You sound a little flaky.
Evolution leading to complex organisms is at least tricky to understand . How about the idiots who, for example, think Bush is comparable to Hitler? That's just as stupid as not believing in evolution, or believing the earth is flat, or whatever. We're surrounded every day by idiots who believe in bizarre things
I believe that Bush is comparable to Hitler, evolution is still an iffy theory (though creationism is ludicrous), the world isn't flat and that you are, quite clearly, an idiot.
myRedbook is a collection of reviews of escorts, written by people who have... erm... visited them. These are juxtaposed with ads of the escorts in question. And there's all these stupid code words, like BBBJ. So it's not exactly "I'll have sex with you for $$$" though everyone knows what the deal is.
SF has a long history of being permissive with the sex trade. Walk west of Van Ness after midnight, especially on the weekends, and you'll think you're in Amsterdam. Law enforcement has taken the unofficial stance "if they're not being violent, let them go." And they go. Boy do they go.
Prostitution is a pretty despicable trade but generally it's the prostitutes who have the worst of it. There's usually someone pulling on their strings, a drug dealer, pimp or whatever, who is smart enough to stay out of jail. Not to mention the public humiliation aspect. And the Creepy Christians who can't stand the sight of anything sexual.
Running a trading application hardly qualifies as innovative or groundbreaking. This guy is capitalizing on publicity generated by people who found it palatable to rip off millions (remember the California energy crisis?), tank the economy, mortgage their employees pensions while maintaining their salaries and golden parachutes, bribe high-ranking government officals (#1 contributor to the Bush campaign... Martha Stewart goes to jail, Ken Lay doesn't?) and relax comfortably on their estates while other people work to pay for their troubles. This guy's a snake. If he had any shame, he'd keep his mouth shut.
No one who works for the city makes squat. They do it because they love the city.
Which makes this dope of a mayor a complete asswipe for firing the guy. But this guy's pretty much an asswipe anyway. I recently spoke with someone who worked for the city and they said when he comes to your office, they make anyone that's over a certain height leave the room for fear a picture might come out that shows the public what a dwarf he is.
But this is America and he's rich, so obviously his character is not to be questioned.
Slashdot Mirror
Or POST the file to a website
Or email the file to yourself using encryption or obfuscation
Or print the thing out
Or call someone up and tell them the info over the phone
The only real defense against employee theft is restricting access to sensitive data
Agreed. There are certain people within a company with the access to take everything down, generally upper management and officers. The company is obligated to trust them. That having been said, if it wasn't for them the company wouldn't exist so it's even steven. If people who aren't in a position of authority can access information like this using an MP3 player, then mistakes have been made.
I would think your bottlenecks would be constant context switches on your proc, cache misses on your virtual memory and seeks within your RAID (at the "hypervisor" level). No matter how good your top-level kernel delegates, it's still a level of indirection before control is passed to the kernels within your virtual machines (who obviously do their own prioritization). If you're running a cluster within a box, this constant delegating and shuffling of data from disparate elements to disparate kernels with disparate priorities would require constant and massive data shifts within the host machine and bring said box to a crawl, wouldn't it?
Just making sure I understand the argument:
Google is better than Yahoo/Microsoft
Google censors, just like Yahoo/Microsoft
Google is still better than Yahoo/Microsoft because people are singling Google out
Everyone knows how Yahoo/Microsoft do business. Google wouldn't be getting slammed unless they were so insistent they were above it all.
Google doesn't want to censor? Easy solution. Don't. They say that they must, because it will cost them market share in an emerging market? Congratulations, Google, you're sacrificing morality for the bottom line, just like Microsoft/Yahoo. You can gussy it up all you want but that's what it is.
There's nothing new about a company getting gritty for what's in the best interests of its bottom line, particularly a company like Google, who is now doing business with entities like governments and large corporations, which are notoriously iffy on the moral front. That's the nature of the beast. Just don't shove this "do no evil" crap down our throats because it's no longer true. Google's not evil, not yet, but the bloom is definitely off the rose.
What country do you live in? In mine, people run around waving flags and cheering as we kill people for oil, while going completely apeshit when Janet Jackson's boob pops out during the Super Bowl.
The United States in its current form is a fundamentalist country. We have a president doing missionary work in China. There's a movement to replace science with scripture. And they're not allowed to use the word "ass" on TNT anymore lest it reach virgin ears.
You mean like the Solaris computing experience? Ask Sun how that worked out. Really, you make exactly the same arguments as those zealots used to use. And ultimately, the company will go *poof* for the same reason. All it's going to take is one truly good Windows release, like all it took was one truly good server OS (Linux) to come out, and Mac will tank like Sun did. Fortunately for Apple, that hasn't happened yet.
The reason Apple came down on these websites is that Apple makes their margins off of reselling hardware. They are a hardware monopoly, just like Sun used to be. If someone were to start distributing a version of OSX that ran on x86 , that would be a bad thing for their bottom line.
I hate to break it to you, but the world will go on after you die. There will be people just as bright and interested in things like this as you are (or aren't).
Astroscience is about advancing the species, not the nation, not the corporation, not the individual, but humanity itself. In space are the answers to all of our questions (origins of life, divinity or lack thereof, the nature of sentience, possible existence of other dimensions, the relative success of our species and planet compared to other species and planets). We are as ignorant about such things as we were about electricity not too long ago. Because there are those who would prefer we stay that way, for sake of the belief we are somehow the center and culmination of all universal existence (how absurd!), it's necessary for those who know better to push these projects forward even though the results won't be present until long after we're dead.
PPV movies, TV shows and the like make better sense over IP because they can be ordered, queued and displayed once sufficient buffering has taken place. It's odd that cable companies would allow such a thing to take place, as they currently are the only player in the PPV market. Quite possibly cable modem users will be throttled to telco network destinations (assuming Tivo partners with a telco company) the way telcos are planning to throttle Google.
When you use adwords, Google provides a summary of the number of times the phrase you're targeting has been queried in the previous n days to provide an estimate of how many clicks you can expect. So if you wanted the phrase "Osama Bin Laden" to point to your ad, you would see how many times people have searched for that term (and how many times they clicked through). Obviously they don't show you who searched for that term, but the information for a specific search term isn't that hard to come by.
This makes it seem like either the government is asking for more than they're letting on or Google is grandstanding.
Cool, let me run out and buy a $2500 laptop so I can run BSD with a fancy Window manager and join a user base of pretentious wire-rimmed freaks. Maybe if you guys stopped patting each other on the back long enough, you'd notice you got jerked over on hardware.
My ex loved Macs. Bought one of those cube things. What junk.
Um honey, that thing's a piece of crap and your OS crashes constantly.
Yes, but it's so pretty.
Exactly. Style over substance. You knock yourself out. Just don't spill your latte on the keyboard as you tuck your earbuds in.
Any mid-to-large sized company isn't going to be broken by an IT salary. If you state politely and firmly that this is what you want and you won't accept any less, than the decision lies with them. If you don't state that up front, they'll assume there's some flexibility.
This assumes you know what you want. Many people I've interviewed don't.
The companies I've had the most trouble with are HR-driven companies. These are companies where compensation and hiring decisions come from HR. The financial industry in New York is a good example. An HR person can't tell who is talented and who isn't. All they have to go on is years of experience. The worst is when they go to those God-awful websites which say "this is how much a network administrator with 5 years of experience should make." When you tell them they're about 40% low, they'll tell you "thank you very much, goodbye."
In the Bay Area, most hiring decisions are made by the department head. This makes the most sense, as they are the only ones who can decrypt our skill set. They know how much someone who is really good is worth and, more importantly, how useless someone who isn't very good can be. Hopefully the company you're interested in works like that.
Are you going to be routing other people's traffic in your network? Is someone else going to route yours? You're going to have to unless you want to just network with people in wireless range. What if they abuse it? What if they start distributing Warez or Pr0n or MP3z or episodes of Saved By The Bell and choke down all your resources? What if they start selling snake oil and angry consumers start pounding on your door? What if they hack the NSA and men in sunglasses start pounding at your door? What if your network becomes so popular you need to go to routing protocol but half the people on your network haven't a clue how to do it properly and routinely screw the entire thing up? What if some guy somewhere keeps sniffing packets and you find various charges on your credit card bill each month you didn't make? These are problems you don't want but other people have assumed.
The Tier 1 networks our packets flow over, where these rhetorical envelopes could be steamed open, are incredibly complicated beasts maintained by some of the more intelligent people in our industry. The human obstacles are equally significant. While I wouldn't nominate any Tier 1 for a Nobel Peace Prize, they do a terrific job from a certain point of view and there wouldn't be an Internet without them.
This kind of statistical propoganda is ludicrous. It just goes to show you ... um ... um ... what was I saying? What were we talking about? Where am I? Who are you?
"Sir, you've just violated the DMCA by making our mistakes public. Off to jail you go."
The only way to tell a phishing email from a regular email is to examine the link that points to "Give Me Your Information."
Been to Chernobyl lately? Try walking around without a radiation suit and when you get back home, you can mutter to yourself about "irrational environment types" as you count your tumors. Hey look! I just got another one on my nuts!
There is no panacea. Our societies are going to regress for lack of forward-thinking by people in power (and those who put them in power).
A competent Unix systems administrator I know thinks hypnotism is nothing but a parlor trick and being able to make people cluck like chickens in front of drunken college students hardly qualifies one to make definitive judgments about what addiction is or isn't.
A competent hypnotist ... unbelievable.
Prepare yourself for a life of being branded unhealthy, addicted, insane and/or dangerous.
In love? Come on. They're a company. They made a good search engine, some good web apps and such, but they are profit motivated.
"Don't be evil" has changed from a loosely-defined guiding principle to a justification for doing whatever they think is right. If they don't think it's evil, then that's all that matters. I strongly doubt in their early days they would have believed you if you told them the kind of crap they're doing nowadays. Today, they just say "Hey, we're the cool company that says don't be evil."
If the only thing stopping them is something as ambiguous as "good" and "evil", then you can expect them to become increasingly corrupt, especially with their stock price starting to dip and some extraordinarily powerful investors starting to lean on them to do what makes the most sense financially, as opposed to morally.
Is there anything more mythical than a man-in-the-middle attack? It's the one attack everyone seems to know the name of (it is a nifty name) yet no one seems to understand. I still haven't met anyone who has pulled one off. A certificate, self-signed or signed by a CA, has nothing to do with it ... it's the underlying encryption algorithm that makes it impossible to modify packets on the fly and act as a intermediary for a conversation.
Oh no! A dreaded Fumcrult! Lock up your daughters! He might liberate them or oppress them or sell them for a few rubles or something. We're not quite sure.
Could you have any more affiliations? You sound a little flaky.
I believe that Bush is comparable to Hitler, evolution is still an iffy theory (though creationism is ludicrous), the world isn't flat and that you are, quite clearly, an idiot.
How's that for bizarre?
SF has a long history of being permissive with the sex trade. Walk west of Van Ness after midnight, especially on the weekends, and you'll think you're in Amsterdam. Law enforcement has taken the unofficial stance "if they're not being violent, let them go." And they go. Boy do they go.
Prostitution is a pretty despicable trade but generally it's the prostitutes who have the worst of it. There's usually someone pulling on their strings, a drug dealer, pimp or whatever, who is smart enough to stay out of jail. Not to mention the public humiliation aspect. And the Creepy Christians who can't stand the sight of anything sexual.
About religion, neocons, rich people who screw over poor people, nationalism and other forms of senseless faith, ignorance and hypocrisy?
No. Never.
You can always tell it's a Christian when they use the word "arrogant".
Running a trading application hardly qualifies as innovative or groundbreaking. This guy is capitalizing on publicity generated by people who found it palatable to rip off millions (remember the California energy crisis?), tank the economy, mortgage their employees pensions while maintaining their salaries and golden parachutes, bribe high-ranking government officals (#1 contributor to the Bush campaign ... Martha Stewart goes to jail, Ken Lay doesn't?) and relax comfortably on their estates while other people work to pay for their troubles. This guy's a snake. If he had any shame, he'd keep his mouth shut.
Anything associated with Enron is evil.
Which makes this dope of a mayor a complete asswipe for firing the guy. But this guy's pretty much an asswipe anyway. I recently spoke with someone who worked for the city and they said when he comes to your office, they make anyone that's over a certain height leave the room for fear a picture might come out that shows the public what a dwarf he is.
But this is America and he's rich, so obviously his character is not to be questioned.