Navigators on the open ocean will be able to accurately determine their longitude by syncing a clock with Big Ben back in London. Latitude can be known with a good astrolabe, but longitude has always been a problem.
Ah, there he is...the ubiquitous blowhard "complaining" that the >$125k he's paid (well over twice the national average) is still too low for his glorious talent.
Hey, why not try your hand in sub-Saharan Africa? Almost no competion at all! Just think how much money you'll make! Hahahahahahhaahaa!!!
At a higher level, this just indicates the extraordinary influence (coersion? CIA blackmail?) the US wields. Just why would Sweden (of all places) dance to Hillary's tune? Their politics runs more the opposite.
...or perhaps even relatively left leaning Sweden is also no fan of somebody who's demonstrated a willingness to publish whatever state secrets happen to fall in his lap.
If one of our diplomats form a negative opinion about a world leader and they're tempted to share that opinion with a colleague, should they just keep it to themselves, or can they share it with their colleague, but only if they inform the world leader in question, too? Are they morally obligated to confess their thoughts to the target of that opinion as soon as they form it? Help me out here.
Espionage is right out and we'll dissolve the military because it's the "antithesis of democracy". They just want us to believe that countries need militaries and intelligence agencies, right?
Oh yeah, how do we convince the rest of the world to play by our new enlightened rules?
No matter how this turns out, I'm sure we are entering a new era, a new paradigm. Let's hope that it's for the better.
Not likely. Wikileaks is providing the government with fodder for a new round of restrictions. Remember the days when you could walk out to the gate to meet your friends arriving at the airport? Not any more. Today it may be legal to post stolen govenment secrets. Check back 5 years from now and send your thanks to wikileaks and their supporters.
It just takes an asshole.
You might conclude, based only on this forum, that the public is generally in support of wikileaks, but it's not and I don't need a poll to know this. I know because there's no debate in Washington (Ron Paul doesn't count, of course) over whether publishing the documents was an attack on the US. The administration, which a large percentage of the country considers left-leaning, is itself condemning it. New legislation won't be difficult to pass.
There was a time when wikileaks could have been considered sort of a good guy, but it's becoming more obvious with each release that they simply hate the US. How can disclosing the list sites we consider strategic possibly be construed as "whistle blowing"?
Take 5 minutes and think about your "cause". All internal documents, diplomatic correspondence, etc. rightfully belongs in the global public domain? Really? The vast majority of thinking people, which believe it or not world leaders tend to be, don't even feel the need to explain their opposition to this absurd notion. There is no "open source" in international diplomacy...this is the real world.
I would argue that about 8% really do need a laptop - those who work on the road. My mom is typical. This year she bought one, or as I call it "her $2,400 portable DVD player".
In the seven years that you've gone without a desktop, I've been working on the same PC. Of course I've added to it and swapped out parts (video card, processor, memory, drive, peripherals) so my games run nice 'n' smooth. It's as though I've bought maybe two cheap PC's. Which laptop are you on? Your 5th? 6th? You're probably thinking about chucking your current one this year, aren't you. Fool!
Totally agree. I remember shopping for an MP3 player and finding it very difficult to identify which had "protection" built in and to what degree. Lord knows the kid at the Circuit City didn't have a clue.
It would be great if there were a web page devoted to this kind of information. A kind of hardware/software review utility where people could go to find out how likely they would have unrestricted use of what they paid for. It could apply an overall "intrusiveness rating" to products, giving consumers an easy at-a-glance overview, and manufacturers an incentive to decide which side of the fence to be on.
I'd even pay a subscription fee for this kind of information, but I probably wouldn't have to because retail advertising would be a logical tie-in.
Of course it's not in Microsoft's interest to prevent malware.
First, think about the average PC user. They don't read Slashdot...think your mom. The PC that she had 8 years ago is *PLENTY* sufficient for her needs: surfing the net, doing email, some word processing and maybe some spreadsheet work. But Microsoft doesn't get paid if people don't keep buying Windows.
After a few years, mom's computer "got old". It used to be zippy, but now it just doesn't work like it used to. It takes a long time to boot up, all programs function slower, IE keeps crashing and popups keep happening even when she's not browsing. What's she going to do? Wipe her hard drive and reinstall windows? If you think more than 2% of the general population could successfully do this, then you've been locked away in the IT department for too long. She's going to go to the Gateway store over by the mall and shell out for brand new computer, complete with a full copy of Windows and maybe even Office ($$$). So rather than selling just one license per person, Microsoft sucks hundreds of dollars out of them every few years.
As has been pointed out, most of the worst malware got there because she agreed to run an executable - a screen saver, an Active X control hosted on some web site, a free file-sharing program bundled to the hilt with adware, etc. Norton may keep your mom from falling for the latest email-borne virus but is it going to stop her from launching a setup program that she really wants to run? You can't blame Microsoft for this.
Now on the other hand, those of us that do know something about computers should understand that virus protection software is for the fools that don't know any better. I've been running Win2k on the same box for years. It is *CLEAN*, and I've never paid for virus protection. I get curious every once in a while, run a scan, and it will warn me about my infected cookies - yeah whatever. I don't run questionable executables and I keep up with the Windows updates...that's it. There's nothing I hate more than a bunch of memory resident applications clogging up my system, and I'll be damned if I'm going to load one that checks out every single file operation I perform, and actually *PAY* an annual fee for it.
.NET is not the skill you need to "break into IT". Nor is any other platform or language.
It's my personal opinion is that the mentality a successful programming career requires is something you almost have to be born with. You need to not only excel at solving complex problems on your own, but must enjoy it. There are plenty of very smart people (smarter than me) who can't put together a simple app - they just don't have the patience.
You're reading slashdot - that's a good sign. But I'd be suspicious of someone trying to enter the field who hadn't picked up some skills on their own, as a hobby. I bought my first computer in 8th grade (1983) and spent much of my high school years making games on it. I wrote an adventure game on my HP calculator. This may sound ridiculous but I'll bet a lot of people reading this have similar stories. Most of the programmers I know are basically introverted - not in any extreme way, they just function well on their own. Someone with a very outgoing personality, a "people person", would probably do better in another field. For someone who's intelligent and ambitious, there are plenty of jobs that pay better than programmer.
That said, if you're confident that you should be a programmer, I'd say learning.NET on your own with books and tutorials would be a good first step. If it doesn't hold your interest then it probably wasn't meant to be.
Unless you have a CS degree, your.NET noodling alone is not likely to land you a job. Fortunately for you there is a really low barrier to entry into the programming profession. I'll tell you what's worked for me and other people I know. Hire on to a small to medium sized company (if you're not in one already) with an IT infrastructure, but not a mature software development division. Start in whatever menial position you can qualify for, but let your abilities and interests be known to the IT group. Then look for opportunities - processes that you could help automate using MS Access, scripting, or whatever they have on hand. If you do well I guarantee you there will be no lack of projects coming your way, and in a couple of years you'll have some good resume fodder. This approach will gain you valuable industry insight and business analysis skills as well - something that university taught developers often lack. Hopefully your novice code and ill-conceived projects won't have too much damage before you can join a real development team, and learn about the software development lifecycle.
Slashdot Mirror
Didn't American Express try to introduce public key technology using smart-cards like a decade ago?
Well here's another...
Navigators on the open ocean will be able to accurately determine their longitude by syncing a clock with Big Ben back in London. Latitude can be known with a good astrolabe, but longitude has always been a problem.
Ah, there he is...the ubiquitous blowhard "complaining" that the >$125k he's paid (well over twice the national average) is still too low for his glorious talent.
Hey, why not try your hand in sub-Saharan Africa? Almost no competion at all! Just think how much money you'll make! Hahahahahahhaahaa!!!
You're probably an asshole, but just haven't figured it out yet.
At a higher level, this just indicates the extraordinary influence (coersion? CIA blackmail?) the US wields. Just why would Sweden
(of all places) dance to Hillary's tune? Their politics runs more the opposite.
...or perhaps even relatively left leaning Sweden is also no fan of somebody who's demonstrated a willingness to publish whatever state secrets happen to fall in his lap.
OK, let me see if I got this straight...
If one of our diplomats form a negative opinion about a world leader and they're tempted to share that opinion with a colleague, should they just keep it to themselves, or can they share it with their colleague, but only if they inform the world leader in question, too? Are they morally obligated to confess their thoughts to the target of that opinion as soon as they form it? Help me out here.
Espionage is right out and we'll dissolve the military because it's the "antithesis of democracy". They just want us to believe that countries need militaries and intelligence agencies, right?
Oh yeah, how do we convince the rest of the world to play by our new enlightened rules?
No matter how this turns out, I'm sure we are entering a new era, a new paradigm. Let's hope that it's for the better.
Not likely. Wikileaks is providing the government with fodder for a new round of restrictions. Remember the days when you could walk out to the gate to meet your friends arriving at the airport? Not any more. Today it may be legal to post stolen govenment secrets. Check back 5 years from now and send your thanks to wikileaks and their supporters. It just takes an asshole. You might conclude, based only on this forum, that the public is generally in support of wikileaks, but it's not and I don't need a poll to know this. I know because there's no debate in Washington (Ron Paul doesn't count, of course) over whether publishing the documents was an attack on the US. The administration, which a large percentage of the country considers left-leaning, is itself condemning it. New legislation won't be difficult to pass. There was a time when wikileaks could have been considered sort of a good guy, but it's becoming more obvious with each release that they simply hate the US. How can disclosing the list sites we consider strategic possibly be construed as "whistle blowing"? Take 5 minutes and think about your "cause". All internal documents, diplomatic correspondence, etc. rightfully belongs in the global public domain? Really? The vast majority of thinking people, which believe it or not world leaders tend to be, don't even feel the need to explain their opposition to this absurd notion. There is no "open source" in international diplomacy...this is the real world.
I would argue that about 8% really do need a laptop - those who work on the road. My mom is typical. This year she bought one, or as I call it "her $2,400 portable DVD player".
In the seven years that you've gone without a desktop, I've been working on the same PC. Of course I've added to it and swapped out parts (video card, processor, memory, drive, peripherals) so my games run nice 'n' smooth. It's as though I've bought maybe two cheap PC's. Which laptop are you on? Your 5th? 6th? You're probably thinking about chucking your current one this year, aren't you. Fool!
Totally agree. I remember shopping for an MP3 player and finding it very difficult to identify which had "protection" built in and to what degree. Lord knows the kid at the Circuit City didn't have a clue.
It would be great if there were a web page devoted to this kind of information. A kind of hardware/software review utility where people could go to find out how likely they would have unrestricted use of what they paid for. It could apply an overall "intrusiveness rating" to products, giving consumers an easy at-a-glance overview, and manufacturers an incentive to decide which side of the fence to be on.
I'd even pay a subscription fee for this kind of information, but I probably wouldn't have to because retail advertising would be a logical tie-in.
Does something like this exist already?
Of course it's not in Microsoft's interest to prevent malware.
First, think about the average PC user. They don't read Slashdot...think your mom. The PC that she had 8 years ago is *PLENTY* sufficient for her needs: surfing the net, doing email, some word processing and maybe some spreadsheet work. But Microsoft doesn't get paid if people don't keep buying Windows.
After a few years, mom's computer "got old". It used to be zippy, but now it just doesn't work like it used to. It takes a long time to boot up, all programs function slower, IE keeps crashing and popups keep happening even when she's not browsing. What's she going to do? Wipe her hard drive and reinstall windows? If you think more than 2% of the general population could successfully do this, then you've been locked away in the IT department for too long. She's going to go to the Gateway store over by the mall and shell out for brand new computer, complete with a full copy of Windows and maybe even Office ($$$). So rather than selling just one license per person, Microsoft sucks hundreds of dollars out of them every few years.
As has been pointed out, most of the worst malware got there because she agreed to run an executable - a screen saver, an Active X control hosted on some web site, a free file-sharing program bundled to the hilt with adware, etc. Norton may keep your mom from falling for the latest email-borne virus but is it going to stop her from launching a setup program that she really wants to run? You can't blame Microsoft for this.
Now on the other hand, those of us that do know something about computers should understand that virus protection software is for the fools that don't know any better. I've been running Win2k on the same box for years. It is *CLEAN*, and I've never paid for virus protection. I get curious every once in a while, run a scan, and it will warn me about my infected cookies - yeah whatever. I don't run questionable executables and I keep up with the Windows updates...that's it. There's nothing I hate more than a bunch of memory resident applications clogging up my system, and I'll be damned if I'm going to load one that checks out every single file operation I perform, and actually *PAY* an annual fee for it.
.NET is not the skill you need to "break into IT". Nor is any other platform or language.
.NET on your own with books and tutorials would be a good first step. If it doesn't hold your interest then it probably wasn't meant to be.
.NET noodling alone is not likely to land you a job. Fortunately for you there is a really low barrier to entry into the programming profession. I'll tell you what's worked for me and other people I know. Hire on to a small to medium sized company (if you're not in one already) with an IT infrastructure, but not a mature software development division. Start in whatever menial position you can qualify for, but let your abilities and interests be known to the IT group. Then look for opportunities - processes that you could help automate using MS Access, scripting, or whatever they have on hand. If you do well I guarantee you there will be no lack of projects coming your way, and in a couple of years you'll have some good resume fodder. This approach will gain you valuable industry insight and business analysis skills as well - something that university taught developers often lack. Hopefully your novice code and ill-conceived projects won't have too much damage before you can join a real development team, and learn about the software development lifecycle.
It's my personal opinion is that the mentality a successful programming career requires is something you almost have to be born with. You need to not only excel at solving complex problems on your own, but must enjoy it. There are plenty of very smart people (smarter than me) who can't put together a simple app - they just don't have the patience.
You're reading slashdot - that's a good sign. But I'd be suspicious of someone trying to enter the field who hadn't picked up some skills on their own, as a hobby. I bought my first computer in 8th grade (1983) and spent much of my high school years making games on it. I wrote an adventure game on my HP calculator. This may sound ridiculous but I'll bet a lot of people reading this have similar stories. Most of the programmers I know are basically introverted - not in any extreme way, they just function well on their own. Someone with a very outgoing personality, a "people person", would probably do better in another field. For someone who's intelligent and ambitious, there are plenty of jobs that pay better than programmer.
That said, if you're confident that you should be a programmer, I'd say learning
Unless you have a CS degree, your
Good Luck
The worm posts data collected to a specific server. Isn't that kind of evidence that could be used to determine who's responsible for it?