1) I'd ask them what has the security experience been over the period you have supported them? While headline after headline has been in the paper about Windows exploits, botnets and viruses, what has happened with their installation.
2) I'd inform them that Google runs on Linux. Do they think Google knows what they are doing.
3) I'd tell them to talk to one of the people who is selling the windows services, and ask them to detail the costs of converting to MSFT, and what the security measures required would be. I think they'll blink after they get the price tag.
Sad to say, even if Windows was more secure, most people will balk at the expense if they're already running a solid linux based infrastructure.
See many white people working on farms? Go to a Home Depot, and look at the day labor guys lined up in the parking lot. See any 'American' faces in that group?
If there are people willing to do the work for the going rate, then the going rate is apparently fair enough. If the spoiled brats of america don't want to do that work, good for them, but that doesn't make their bills my problem.
A fair wage is what someone will accept to do the work. There are a shitload of people that would be more than willing to come to the US and do the work, if we would let them. There are a shitload of people in the US who don't want hard working competition. That suggest strongly to me that US wage levels aren't at a level that is fair for the people paying for the work.
Now, I readily admit that I benefit from that situation, but as an economist, I recognize that we employees are enjoying a protectionist situation. Employers are behaving rationally when they seek to move the work elsewhere.
It's not exactly a strange idea to think there's some reason that the successful should do something in return.
Another way to think about it is that taxes are a user fee for the infrastructure of the company that made and keeps you wealthy. The wealthier you are, the more you benefit from the stability that our country provides, whether you believe or not.
It costs money to keep the peasants from revolting.
Exactly. WHo else is going to use their RSS feed now? They killed the golden goose, and devalued their online asset, by pursuing someone who was politely playing by the rules.
which is why we, the citizens, may not need nukes, but assault rifles are handy. With AK47s readily available, the iraqis have been able to discourage a much superior force. But if they didn't have AK47's and plastique, where would they be?
The proof that there is no real terrorist threat, and the whole terrorist threat thing is the equivalent of government conspiracy theory daydreams, is that something this simple and easy has never happened
Exactly. This country is porous and filled with soft targets. The airports are still porous (I carried a knife through security undetected two weeks ago by accident).
Despite this being true, and known to millions upon millions of people with no love for america, nothing has happened. There are no triumphant news articles about thwarted planes, no near misses. Just, nothing...
Now, there will be something again. We had the world trade center bombings in 1992, we had 9/11 in 2001, I'd say we're likely to have some new generation nutcases sometime in the next 5 years, because, well, nutcases exist. But the vast legions of radicals that Bush and Cheney used to keep the populace in check with fear with, they just don't exist.
Not to introduce facts into the discussion or anything, but if you read the transcripts of the recent SCOTUS decision on the Washington DC arms laws, the historical records cited seem to indicate clearly that the contemporary discussions around the second amendment were precisely around the question of the people having the same arms as the government, and that the feelings of the forefathers was pretty much, if the government can have them, then the people can, too.
So, by logical extension, certainly such things as what are commonly called assault rifles were well within the intents of the founding fathers of being among the arms that the people should be allowed to possess. I dunno how they would feel about nukes. I think they would be clearly -for- me being allowed to have a fully armed blackhawk helicopter.
The second amendment isn't about what makes citizens feel safe from each other. It's about what allows citizens to feel safe from their government. While the NRA types rant and rave about self protection from the miscreants of society, that isn't what the drafters of the bill of rights were concerned with. Because of their concerns, the logical extension of the second amendment is that if weapons technologies advance, then the peoples' rights should advance as well. The goal is parity between the populace and the rulers.
That may or may not be what we want now, but that what the drafters of the constitution appear to have thought. Personally, I line up with them.
Before you pooh-pooh this too deeply, let me just remind you of the predecessor conditions to the french revolution, and the rise of Hitler. France and Germany were declining in power and influence. The previous governments had massively fucked up, people were in dire straights, the currency was debased and inflating wildly, and it was generally a bad place to be. Authoritarian leaders came to power, and... Sound familiar?
Still sure you want the government to have all the good guns?
This might be important in drier climes. I've been doing this for a long time in the pacific northwest. I started after seeing the DEC engineer doing it on our VAXes a long time ago (back when an 11/780 was cool)
Also using high speed air across fans making them spin much faster than normal can cause DC perm magnet fans to induce voltage back into the motherboard like a generator, This may be true, but I've been doing it for 20 years without incident.
Aircan? Try using a vacuum, and then the dust won't end up somewhere else in your area.
I have to vacuum out our home computers every 6 months, due to too many dogs in the house. It's pretty impressive how gummed up the heat sinks are when I open up the cases to do this.
Python or java/jsp. Python for fast development, Java/jsp for scalability/enterprise acceptability. I am using python/Jython for new work at my fortune 500 employer. This lets me fairly easily embed existing java code into the glueware I am building.
I use Vista for the same purpose I use Sarah Palin, an instant intelligence test. If you accept either you have failed the test.
I accept Vista, and do software architecture and statistical modeling for a living, with some software development on the side. I guess those must be easier than I thought. Though I don't have much use for Palin.;-)
Jeez, bud, give up the hate. It's not that big a deal.
I think you're mistaken. Most users running Vista are running it because it was on the machine they bought. For the vast majority of users, It Just Works (tm). Get used to it.
I have three XP (one home, two Pro) machines, 2 Vista Machines, a plethora of Windows Server (2000, 2003) machines and a dozen or so Linux boxen. Frankly, I don't see what the fuss is. Vista works reasonably well, and is as functional for what I use it for as any of the other choices.
Slashdot Mirror
Not that we don't respect that...
Um, bullshit. I've had a couple of cats that we got as 8 week old kittens that grew up into quite effective hunters. A couple of dogs, too.
Seriously, "buffers differently"? What's THAT supposed to mean?
One example is how and when data gets written to disk in the absence of a flush().
1) I'd ask them what has the security experience been over the period you have supported them? While headline after headline has been in the paper about Windows exploits, botnets and viruses, what has happened with their installation.
2) I'd inform them that Google runs on Linux. Do they think Google knows what they are doing.
3) I'd tell them to talk to one of the people who is selling the windows services, and ask them to detail the costs of converting to MSFT, and what the security measures required would be. I think they'll blink after they get the price tag.
Sad to say, even if Windows was more secure, most people will balk at the expense if they're already running a solid linux based infrastructure.
Um, look up 'Bump keys'. Say, here
MSFT has 50,000 employees worldwide.
94,000 before the layoff, per the local (Seattle) paper this week.
There are no jobs that Americans won't do
See many white people working on farms? Go to a Home Depot, and look at the day labor guys lined up in the parking lot. See any 'American' faces in that group?
If there are people willing to do the work for the going rate, then the going rate is apparently fair enough. If the spoiled brats of america don't want to do that work, good for them, but that doesn't make their bills my problem.
A fair wage is what someone will accept to do the work. There are a shitload of people that would be more than willing to come to the US and do the work, if we would let them. There are a shitload of people in the US who don't want hard working competition. That suggest strongly to me that US wage levels aren't at a level that is fair for the people paying for the work.
Now, I readily admit that I benefit from that situation, but as an economist, I recognize that we employees are enjoying a protectionist situation. Employers are behaving rationally when they seek to move the work elsewhere.
It's not exactly a strange idea to think there's some reason that the successful should do something in return.
Another way to think about it is that taxes are a user fee for the infrastructure of the company that made and keeps you wealthy. The wealthier you are, the more you benefit from the stability that our country provides, whether you believe or not.
It costs money to keep the peasants from revolting.
Michael Dell is too cheap to pay for the country that created him
Could that have something to do with his customers being to cheap to buy american goods?
Exactly. WHo else is going to use their RSS feed now? They killed the golden goose, and devalued their online asset, by pursuing someone who was politely playing by the rules.
Then maybe we should make laws about the taking of pictures, not silly little sounds.
Thanks, I don't need to, I've got my own.
Show me the failures. The realistic ones, not the kids who sat around drunk and talked about something that they had no means to implement.
I think the attempt rate is close to zero, though I'm open to being proved wrong.
which is why we, the citizens, may not need nukes, but assault rifles are handy. With AK47s readily available, the iraqis have been able to discourage a much superior force. But if they didn't have AK47's and plastique, where would they be?
The proof that there is no real terrorist threat, and the whole terrorist threat thing is the equivalent of government conspiracy theory daydreams, is that something this simple and easy has never happened
Exactly. This country is porous and filled with soft targets. The airports are still porous (I carried a knife through security undetected two weeks ago by accident).
Despite this being true, and known to millions upon millions of people with no love for america, nothing has happened. There are no triumphant news articles about thwarted planes, no near misses. Just, nothing...
Now, there will be something again. We had the world trade center bombings in 1992, we had 9/11 in 2001, I'd say we're likely to have some new generation nutcases sometime in the next 5 years, because, well, nutcases exist. But the vast legions of radicals that Bush and Cheney used to keep the populace in check with fear with, they just don't exist.
Not to introduce facts into the discussion or anything, but if you read the transcripts of the recent SCOTUS decision on the Washington DC arms laws, the historical records cited seem to indicate clearly that the contemporary discussions around the second amendment were precisely around the question of the people having the same arms as the government, and that the feelings of the forefathers was pretty much, if the government can have them, then the people can, too.
So, by logical extension, certainly such things as what are commonly called assault rifles were well within the intents of the founding fathers of being among the arms that the people should be allowed to possess. I dunno how they would feel about nukes. I think they would be clearly -for- me being allowed to have a fully armed blackhawk helicopter.
The second amendment isn't about what makes citizens feel safe from each other. It's about what allows citizens to feel safe from their government. While the NRA types rant and rave about self protection from the miscreants of society, that isn't what the drafters of the bill of rights were concerned with. Because of their concerns, the logical extension of the second amendment is that if weapons technologies advance, then the peoples' rights should advance as well. The goal is parity between the populace and the rulers.
That may or may not be what we want now, but that what the drafters of the constitution appear to have thought. Personally, I line up with them.
Before you pooh-pooh this too deeply, let me just remind you of the predecessor conditions to the french revolution, and the rise of Hitler. France and Germany were declining in power and influence. The previous governments had massively fucked up, people were in dire straights, the currency was debased and inflating wildly, and it was generally a bad place to be. Authoritarian leaders came to power, and... Sound familiar?
Still sure you want the government to have all the good guns?
This might be important in drier climes. I've been doing this for a long time in the pacific northwest. I started after seeing the DEC engineer doing it on our VAXes a long time ago (back when an 11/780 was cool)
Also using high speed air across fans making them spin much faster
than normal can cause DC perm magnet fans to induce voltage back
into the motherboard like a generator,
This may be true, but I've been doing it for 20 years without incident.
Aircan? Try using a vacuum, and then the dust won't end up somewhere else in your area.
I have to vacuum out our home computers every 6 months, due to too many dogs in the house. It's pretty impressive how gummed up the heat sinks are when I open up the cases to do this.
Python or java/jsp. Python for fast development, Java/jsp for scalability/enterprise acceptability. I am using python/Jython for new work at my fortune 500 employer. This lets me fairly easily embed existing java code into the glueware I am building.
Check out Journyx time control software. It's a significant for profit business application, that works pretty well, and is built on python.
Clearly, it can be done. Frankly, compared to building apps in C, python is, IMLTHO, far better support for large projects.
Vista gets in my way at every step.
Have you considered the possibility that -you- might be the problem? Seems like several of us manage to muddle through.
Typing from a dual boot Vista/Fedora machine, running Vista SP1.
I use Vista for the same purpose I use Sarah Palin, an instant intelligence test. If you accept either you have failed the test.
I accept Vista, and do software architecture and statistical modeling for a living, with some software development on the side. I guess those must be easier than I thought. Though I don't have much use for Palin. ;-)
Jeez, bud, give up the hate. It's not that big a deal.
I think you're mistaken. Most users running Vista are running it because it was on the machine they bought. For the vast majority of users, It Just Works (tm). Get used to it.
I have three XP (one home, two Pro) machines, 2 Vista Machines, a plethora of Windows Server (2000, 2003) machines and a dozen or so Linux boxen. Frankly, I don't see what the fuss is. Vista works reasonably well, and is as functional for what I use it for as any of the other choices.