The article is a little ambiguous about the nature of the information that was stolen. However, I used to work on the Space Shuttle program at Rockwell in the early 90's, so I think I can read between the lines a little here. When I worked on the Shuttle, it was, and probably still is, and entirely declassified program. I was not aware of any part of the Shuttle that would be considered even secret, let alone top secret or higher. I'll reiterate, that I was not "aware". However, I worked in a central data management department. I had access to almost the entire design documentation of the shuttle. I had a secret clearance so I could work on other space programs. Therefore I think that if there were any secret documentation related the Shuttle I would have at least known about its existence. Back to the ambiguity of the article... I can easily see how Boeing could be the one harmed here, not the Federal Govt., as there was a lot of proprietary design in the Shuttle. If that was the sort of information that was being stolen then this is not a matter of national security, its a matter of stealing competitive business methods and information. That is an entirely different issue. Anything that was designed and built by a company without the use of tax dollars, including the design of a light bulb, could have been considered proprietary in the context of the Space Shuttle program. If this is in fact a matter of national security, then I think it is far more likely the secrets stolen, if any, had to do with the payloads the Shuttle has carried. Prior to the Challenger accident, the Air Force used to use the Space Shuttle to boost classified payloads into orbit. Most of those payloads and the associated missions were classified.
In the interest of espousing good advice, I'm going to depart ever so slightly from the topic. Mod me as you will. A few years ago I decided to take matters seriously about protecting my children from the dangers of the internet. I wanted my kids to be internet and computer savvy. I had been completely limiting their online access in the interest of safety. I wasn't happy with that approach. After some research, I discovered Astaro. The home license + annual subscription offered virus and spam protection in the http proxy, and content filtering by category. With that I was able to allow my kids to have their own computers in their own rooms. The firewall provided an adequate level of protection with those capabilities. Besides that, I also talked to my kids about what they should look out for and avoid. I'll repeat... I talked to my kids!
I just looked tonight, and it appears Astaro is providing the virus/spam protection + content filtering for free now. I have been paying about 45 euros annually, and now I discover its free! One caveat, Astaro is an enterprise class firewall. It works great, but its not necessarily easy to setup. There is good documentation, a knowledge base, online walkthrough videos, and a pretty good support forum to help get you through. And, hey, it runs on Linux!
I really wish it were more accessible for the less technically inclined, because it really is an ideal solution for the home.
I'm a software engineer who works remotely, usually from home. I've committed myself to a laptop for the past several years. I admit I had had to force myself to compromise on the ergonomics of a desktop. Ultimately I wanted to give up dedicating a room in my home to a computer. I also want to be able to work anywhere, anytime. The biggest downside to laptops compared to desktops in my experience has been the lifespan of the machine. The power adapter and dc jack has been a main source of failure on all the laptops I've owned. The screen frame and hinge are weak points, too. My desktop machines worked for years and years without much trouble. I tend to wear out a laptop after 2-3 years of daily use.
Every member in the family has a laptop, however we do have a server in the home to handle file and print services among other things. The portability of the laptop has really changed how we all use and rely on a computer throughout our day. A desktop just can't provide that kind of lifestyle. The desktop is like a personal anchor. This is the reason for the popularity of the laptop for all but the most specific reasons to need a desktop.
I would agree with this article mainly from the standpoint that as desktops become a minority the cost of the components will begin to rise as the cost of the laptop continues to fall. The laptop will continue to improve in ergonomics and computing power as the cost falls. Eventually the desktop will be relegated to the most high-end computing needs. Server based applications and network appliances will continue to fill the void between the laptop and the desktop.
All that being said, I don't see how the need for a powerful personal computer will ever disappear.
As with anything, it is a matter of choosing the right tool for the job. It seems to me that.Net is not the right tool for building an OS, device drivers, or foundational components of Windows. It seems more like a tool for building business apps or end user apps. I suppose Microsoft might get some flack if all they did was re-write Notepad in.Net, but it would be the right tool for the job.
Well, I'm no hardware engineer but here are my additional observations of the advantage of DRAM, or less disks in your infrastructure. In my companies colocation facility we have some pretty hefty servers, but nowhere near what I would imagine Google would need. Our db servers have SAN disk storage which requires us to have redundant fiber channels to disk shelf after disk shelf filled with 36GB 15k drives. Of course each of our servers, the primary and the hot standby, have redundant power supplies and are always on. Both of the fiber channel switches have redundant power supplies, and of course, each of the drive shelves have redundant power supplies. Now to accomodate all the power draw we have to pay an extra several thousand a month because we have exceeded our base level of service with our co-loc contract. Believe me, they aren't just passing their cost of electricity on to us. So now we have a recurring monthly cost to keep a whole lotta power supplies running. Now onto the drives. I seem to recall RAID 5 is our usual preference, but clearly we couldn't perform like Google, so Google would likely choose RAID 0/1, which is the most expensive choice for RAID. I could easily see them spending $500k on drives.
Now Googles advantage, from my point of view, is that they don't really need redudancy at all. After all, they are somewhat redundant themselves. If they loose some data due to a failure, they can just run a crawl from another of their systems to reacquire the data they lost. So nix the redundant disk levels and all of the electricity that goes with it. We could probably nix the redudnant fiber too. Now with using scads of DRAM, I would imaging local disks running in a server just to initialize they system and data base in memory on boot up. So now we can nix the fiber all together and probably standby servers too.
Now two things occur to me:
1) did Google purhcase and use all of the infrastructure I just described before they came to the conclusion that DRAM was cheaper?
2) could use a RAID 5 like redunancy of data among the content of their servers so they can tolerate a failure of a server without downtime.
Of course, all of those green blinking lights at our co-loc look cool. We are the envy of our neighbors at the facility. Maybe it is worth it?
More than likely, the company, who is in fact broke, is also in debt up to their ears. The equipment that is being lifted has probably been leased and isn't really even the companies to give. They couldn't liquidate it if they wanted to without the debtor getting all of the proceeds.
A TV program I watched the other day was demonstrating this technology as it is deployed in London. The host of the show, John Clese, disguised himself in several attempts to thwart recogntion and eventually succeeded with a really ugly pair of glasses of the huge variety. These glasses obscured his eyes as well as the brow and cheek bones. It seems that the primary method of the facial recognition system was to measure the eyes and area around them. I can just see the face of the nation being obscured by countermeasures such as masks. Then, when the government passes a law banning wearing large glasses or masks you'll know for sure...
It seems completely reasonable to me that one could use the.Net platform under Ximian or Microsoft for everything except the authentication services of Passport and still benefit from most of the other features of the platform. Then, you could build to use any other authentication service, even if you're dead set on using a centralized service. From what I have read about Passport (and how controversial it is) this seems like a good idea even when using the Microsoft platform. I think that what is really required here is that Passport should surender to become an open standard, and Microsoft will still have plenty of leverage to accomplish total domination. I don't know about you, but it terrifys me to think that Microsoft would one day hold a significant portion of the worlds passwords in thier own database.
Ping statistics for 1.1.1.1:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 0, Lost = 4 (100% loss), Too much natural light interfering with your packet data transmission.
I think these p2p file sharing solutions would benefit if they based on an older paradigm, indexed search engines and FTP. The p2p client/server would simple be a search index exchange. The function of the p2p app would be like talking about file exchange, but not actualy doing the exchange. Then, the actual exchange of data could be executed over FTP, or even HTTP. FTP, of course, has deep business root, and many, many, diferent clients and servers. In fact, even Microsoft as provided the client to every Windows user. HTTP is provided with Personal Web Server too. The legal angle of this exchange paradigm would be like taking on the whole world wide web.
Hmmm, I think I have a new program to write now.
Chew on that one, RIAA (and Metalica)
Just like "faq" became a standard link on a website, what about a "sponsors" link. A sponsors area of a website would allow a visitor to view advertisement if they wanted to, without annoying them, and these pages could be elaborate enough to actually do justice to the sponsors. You could even be candid about the fact that it helps pay the bills of the site and encourage the visitor access these sponsor sites via yours if they do business with them in the future. In other words, be a portal to other sites for fans of your site, while avoiding being annoying. I think advertising is annoying, and it is important. Once in a while I actually see an advertisement that is informative or even amusing, but these are always on tv. I've never seen a banner ad that managed to grab my attention let alone be informative or amusing (except that one with the little monkey you're supposed to click on, I fell for that one once, duh!)
Slashdot Mirror
My God, I'm an insensitive clod... sorry mate.
An understandable oversight since it's Christmas Eve.
The article is a little ambiguous about the nature of the information that was stolen. However, I used to work on the Space Shuttle program at Rockwell in the early 90's, so I think I can read between the lines a little here. When I worked on the Shuttle, it was, and probably still is, and entirely declassified program. I was not aware of any part of the Shuttle that would be considered even secret, let alone top secret or higher. I'll reiterate, that I was not "aware". However, I worked in a central data management department. I had access to almost the entire design documentation of the shuttle. I had a secret clearance so I could work on other space programs. Therefore I think that if there were any secret documentation related the Shuttle I would have at least known about its existence. Back to the ambiguity of the article... I can easily see how Boeing could be the one harmed here, not the Federal Govt., as there was a lot of proprietary design in the Shuttle. If that was the sort of information that was being stolen then this is not a matter of national security, its a matter of stealing competitive business methods and information. That is an entirely different issue. Anything that was designed and built by a company without the use of tax dollars, including the design of a light bulb, could have been considered proprietary in the context of the Space Shuttle program.
If this is in fact a matter of national security, then I think it is far more likely the secrets stolen, if any, had to do with the payloads the Shuttle has carried. Prior to the Challenger accident, the Air Force used to use the Space Shuttle to boost classified payloads into orbit. Most of those payloads and the associated missions were classified.
In the interest of espousing good advice, I'm going to depart ever so slightly from the topic. Mod me as you will. A few years ago I decided to take matters seriously about protecting my children from the dangers of the internet. I wanted my kids to be internet and computer savvy. I had been completely limiting their online access in the interest of safety. I wasn't happy with that approach. After some research, I discovered Astaro. The home license + annual subscription offered virus and spam protection in the http proxy, and content filtering by category. With that I was able to allow my kids to have their own computers in their own rooms. The firewall provided an adequate level of protection with those capabilities. Besides that, I also talked to my kids about what they should look out for and avoid. I'll repeat... I talked to my kids!
I just looked tonight, and it appears Astaro is providing the virus/spam protection + content filtering for free now. I have been paying about 45 euros annually, and now I discover its free! One caveat, Astaro is an enterprise class firewall. It works great, but its not necessarily easy to setup. There is good documentation, a knowledge base, online walkthrough videos, and a pretty good support forum to help get you through. And, hey, it runs on Linux!
I really wish it were more accessible for the less technically inclined, because it really is an ideal solution for the home.
I'm a software engineer who works remotely, usually from home. I've committed myself to a laptop for the past several years. I admit I had had to force myself to compromise on the ergonomics of a desktop. Ultimately I wanted to give up dedicating a room in my home to a computer. I also want to be able to work anywhere, anytime. The biggest downside to laptops compared to desktops in my experience has been the lifespan of the machine. The power adapter and dc jack has been a main source of failure on all the laptops I've owned. The screen frame and hinge are weak points, too. My desktop machines worked for years and years without much trouble. I tend to wear out a laptop after 2-3 years of daily use.
Every member in the family has a laptop, however we do have a server in the home to handle file and print services among other things. The portability of the laptop has really changed how we all use and rely on a computer throughout our day. A desktop just can't provide that kind of lifestyle. The desktop is like a personal anchor. This is the reason for the popularity of the laptop for all but the most specific reasons to need a desktop.
I would agree with this article mainly from the standpoint that as desktops become a minority the cost of the components will begin to rise as the cost of the laptop continues to fall. The laptop will continue to improve in ergonomics and computing power as the cost falls. Eventually the desktop will be relegated to the most high-end computing needs. Server based applications and network appliances will continue to fill the void between the laptop and the desktop.
All that being said, I don't see how the need for a powerful personal computer will ever disappear.
Just my two cents.
Get your company signed up as an early adopter on the next beta version of Exchange. It will surely solve all your problems!
As with anything, it is a matter of choosing the right tool for the job. It seems to me that .Net is not the right tool for building an OS, device drivers, or foundational components of Windows. It seems more like a tool for building business apps or end user apps. I suppose Microsoft might get some flack if all they did was re-write Notepad in .Net, but it would be the right tool for the job.
Say Mr. Baker, thats a neat Landshark, er, is that a barnacle on the side there?
Well, I'm no hardware engineer but here are my additional observations of the advantage of DRAM, or less disks in your infrastructure. In my companies colocation facility we have some pretty hefty servers, but nowhere near what I would imagine Google would need. Our db servers have SAN disk storage which requires us to have redundant fiber channels to disk shelf after disk shelf filled with 36GB 15k drives. Of course each of our servers, the primary and the hot standby, have redundant power supplies and are always on. Both of the fiber channel switches have redundant power supplies, and of course, each of the drive shelves have redundant power supplies. Now to accomodate all the power draw we have to pay an extra several thousand a month because we have exceeded our base level of service with our co-loc contract. Believe me, they aren't just passing their cost of electricity on to us. So now we have a recurring monthly cost to keep a whole lotta power supplies running. Now onto the drives. I seem to recall RAID 5 is our usual preference, but clearly we couldn't perform like Google, so Google would likely choose RAID 0/1, which is the most expensive choice for RAID. I could easily see them spending $500k on drives.
Now Googles advantage, from my point of view, is that they don't really need redudancy at all. After all, they are somewhat redundant themselves. If they loose some data due to a failure, they can just run a crawl from another of their systems to reacquire the data they lost. So nix the redundant disk levels and all of the electricity that goes with it. We could probably nix the redudnant fiber too. Now with using scads of DRAM, I would imaging local disks running in a server just to initialize they system and data base in memory on boot up. So now we can nix the fiber all together and probably standby servers too.
Now two things occur to me:
1) did Google purhcase and use all of the infrastructure I just described before they came to the conclusion that DRAM was cheaper?
2) could use a RAID 5 like redunancy of data among the content of their servers so they can tolerate a failure of a server without downtime.
Of course, all of those green blinking lights at our co-loc look cool. We are the envy of our neighbors at the facility. Maybe it is worth it?
More than likely, the company, who is in fact broke, is also in debt up to their ears. The equipment that is being lifted has probably been leased and isn't really even the companies to give. They couldn't liquidate it if they wanted to without the debtor getting all of the proceeds.
A TV program I watched the other day was demonstrating this technology as it is deployed in London. The host of the show, John Clese, disguised himself in several attempts to thwart recogntion and eventually succeeded with a really ugly pair of glasses of the huge variety. These glasses obscured his eyes as well as the brow and cheek bones. It seems that the primary method of the facial recognition system was to measure the eyes and area around them. I can just see the face of the nation being obscured by countermeasures such as masks. Then, when the government passes a law banning wearing large glasses or masks you'll know for sure...
It seems completely reasonable to me that one could use the .Net platform under Ximian or Microsoft for everything except the authentication services of Passport and still benefit from most of the other features of the platform. Then, you could build to use any other authentication service, even if you're dead set on using a centralized service. From what I have read about Passport (and how controversial it is) this seems like a good idea even when using the Microsoft platform. I think that what is really required here is that Passport should surender to become an open standard, and Microsoft will still have plenty of leverage to accomplish total domination. I don't know about you, but it terrifys me to think that Microsoft would one day hold a significant portion of the worlds passwords in thier own database.
I think these p2p file sharing solutions would benefit if they based on an older paradigm, indexed search engines and FTP. The p2p client/server would simple be a search index exchange. The function of the p2p app would be like talking about file exchange, but not actualy doing the exchange. Then, the actual exchange of data could be executed over FTP, or even HTTP. FTP, of course, has deep business root, and many, many, diferent clients and servers. In fact, even Microsoft as provided the client to every Windows user. HTTP is provided with Personal Web Server too. The legal angle of this exchange paradigm would be like taking on the whole world wide web. Hmmm, I think I have a new program to write now. Chew on that one, RIAA (and Metalica)
Looks like a trash can to me! hmmm.
yeah, your probably right, but i figured with only a 1% click thru rate it couldn't get much worse. hehe.
Just like "faq" became a standard link on a website, what about a "sponsors" link. A sponsors area of a website would allow a visitor to view advertisement if they wanted to, without annoying them, and these pages could be elaborate enough to actually do justice to the sponsors. You could even be candid about the fact that it helps pay the bills of the site and encourage the visitor access these sponsor sites via yours if they do business with them in the future. In other words, be a portal to other sites for fans of your site, while avoiding being annoying. I think advertising is annoying, and it is important. Once in a while I actually see an advertisement that is informative or even amusing, but these are always on tv. I've never seen a banner ad that managed to grab my attention let alone be informative or amusing (except that one with the little monkey you're supposed to click on, I fell for that one once, duh!)