Cheaper is not a variable in an emergency situaton, except to define the cause and ultimate cost. Being cheap on preparation will cause total costs to increase disproportionately to the up front costs of preparing adequately.
Example - shortchanging things such as drinking water and sanitation supplies can result in unnecessary deaths. I don't think we can arrive at an acceptable cost/benefit analysis for saving our mothers' lives in the aftermath of a hurricane jus because they couldn't get water to drink.
Cheaper is wrong in emergency planning. it is not the primary consideration.
The single most important reason for our Federal government to advocate public cloud computing isnot about emergency resources or any such performance features.
It's about surveillance. In the cloud, they only need to deal with the provider, and have access to everything - warrants not necessary. My corporate server is behind a firewall that offers at least minimal resistance. My home server is even more difficult, not because it's any more well secured, but because the government can't so easily coerce the vendor to grant them a back door. No, my home server uses no Microsof or Cisco products at all.
We are not far from having the fight over real privacy and government intrusion. And this Administration, despite its initial promises to be transparent, open, and ethical, has continued the progress of other Administrations into our private information, in all forms.
This is more serious than most of us think. Corporations marshalling our data can lead us into choices we would not otherwise make, deny us opportunities we would otherwise have, and cost us more than we should otherwise have to pay. Government is trying to assert itself into our lives in extrordinary ways, and will use this data to deal with us to our detriment. Healthcare will become a more constrained resource with a single-government-payer system, and the more data they have on us, the better they can make decisions to manage that resource. And that will NOT improve our health. It will only reduce costs.
Where I come from, reducing the cost of something is easily achieved by reducing the quantity or quality of it.
Denying the government private data it shoudl not have is a two-edged sword. First, deny them the need - keep them out of your life as much as possible and practical. Second, challenge their collection of the data at every turn.
The public cloud is very attractive to those who want to see everything. It makes it easier. The debate about emergency services and whether they should be provisioned as dedicated resources is another issue entirely.
True - one fix for sellers is to limit the number of items in any one campaign. Then iterate and improve.
The stock market problem is that HFT will gladly risk 100MM shares for the arbitrage, and if somehow the market evaporates, someone is holding the bag. Which brings us to this problem - despite the regulators' responsibility to, um, regulate, they are nearly always behind the curve. And the REAL problem - our legislature doesn't dare let the brokerages pay for their mistakes, since that would impact their investments also.
If the seller finds that the price was driven below cost by the algorith, how much would you want to bet that they will simply declare the item 'out of stock', and refuse to sell to you?
Groupon has been through an analog of this repeatedly, where someone will offer services for a discount, and get flooded with redemptions such that they cannot afford to do several years' work for nearly nothing. All the examples I'm aware of resulted in the offerer negotiating with their customers and resolving the problem, but Groupon at one time was deaf to the complaints that they should have counseled the merchant better. Probably correct, but not very helpful.
I'm betting reversals will happen, and Amazon will be selective in their punishment of vendors. Net result, mistrust and reduced confidence.
Our best/most valuable/most knowlegable/most flexible team member is 78. He can figure most everything out, and you only have to tell him once. He's only been here 23 years, I hear.
6 years ago I took a gig installing some servers. Among them were some Itanium boxes, and the lead asked who had worked with Itanium before. After everyone else shook their heads, I said I'd have a look at them. Yes, they were UEFI BIOS, and it took me an hour to work out the process to set things and get them ready to boot. In went the server CDs, then the image CDs, then I spent a week getting the images working on the new hardware. We had been assured that the rack and stack was the hard part, and that the images were sound and good to go. Of course not, newer model hardware etc. made that impossible. In a week we, as a team, had new locally updated images loading away without errors, and the Itaniums were online and working on Day 5. No Google, no cheats, I just had to sit down and figure it out. I was 52 at the time, and the oldster on the team, and no one knew it. I pass for 15 years younger in person.
My job now, I'm most valuable not because of my experience, or persistence, or ability to figure stuff out, though all that is critical. What sets me apart is my ability to work with customers of any skill level or temperment, defuse bad situations, and recover from my own and others' gaffes. And I;m not really that good at it. Techies are notoriously bad at customer relations. But it's learnable, and you can Google it up and gain a great deal of good advice.
Be patient with your co-workers, share with them as much as they will tolerate, speak no ill of them, and be patient. You'll either run the place one day or be in a much better position.
There are only three questions to ask of a job candidate. "Can you?" "Will you?" "Will you fit in?" No one is more important than the other. Learn to fit in, because this is the thing you cannot go to school for. All else is taught or summoned up by many. Fitting in is the real struggle. It may not always save your job, but it will not lose you one.
Just don't lose the learn everything attitude. My wife doesn't quite get the concept that in IT your work changes every 3-4 years. She teaches music. Asking her to imagine having to learn new scales, instruments, and signatures every 3-4 years doesn't make any sense to her. She can't imagine it. I've been at this since MS-DOS 2.2. Things have changed.
In 2006 I lost my cards at the gym - don't go there any more either. Next morning, on the way to work I get a call from my bank - 'Are you in las Vegas by any chance?' No, I am not, but my cards are, and had just bought something at a gas station for a few bucks, triggering an alert. Yup, my card was at a casino trying to load up on chips for some fun. I was assured they would not be loading up on my dime. I got two other calls in rapid succession from other banks and such, same story.
If my card was snagged and used locally, they might get away with it for a bit, but go too far and at least one of my banks etc would be asking me where I was.
While gas stations have somewhat different fraud rules, they don't want fraud any more than you. It is inefficient, bad for business, and always costs them something.
Using similar methods for e-voting sounds appealing; dispute resolution, notificaiton of out of pattern activity, etc, but this could be solved by giving you a receipt for your vote, scanning it with your phone or inputting the key into the website, and protesting anything that looks wrong.
And after all this, the system could STILL be gamed by counting imaginary results despite all the confirmations. Only by tramping down to the polls a few days later and running your wrinkled, faded, written-on receipt could you participate in a recount of any meaning. Better than nothing, but OCR paper ballots can do this now.
E-voting is not interesting to me yet. It serves someone else's purposes, not mine.
I wopiudl be interested in the naive idea that users shouidl be able to turn secure boot on and off. So if it's off, no Windows but other OSes could boot. On, and Windows would boot, but other OSes may or may not.
Then, if I choose to NOT use Windows, I'm in a much simpler reality.
"I want to be able to switch distros without jumping through hoops (yes, there are hoops to jump through now; this move by Canonical does nothing to advance any solution to that problem)."
So you want what you what you not only do not have now, but somehow manage without.
So you want Grand Unification between distributions. Oh my. I doubt we could even get decent migration tools between the major distros, 'major' defined as the ones you and I use.:)
"Treat all commenters in this discussion with suspicion and derision."
Suspicion is the norm around here. Derision is the default action of many/most.
I can't hardly tell the difference between the misinformed, ignorant, or paid/unpaid shills. So I end up considering the content of comments. Radical and time consuming, but hey, what else do I have to do?
Slashdot Mirror
Cheaper is not a variable in an emergency situaton, except to define the cause and ultimate cost. Being cheap on preparation will cause total costs to increase disproportionately to the up front costs of preparing adequately.
Example - shortchanging things such as drinking water and sanitation supplies can result in unnecessary deaths. I don't think we can arrive at an acceptable cost/benefit analysis for saving our mothers' lives in the aftermath of a hurricane jus because they couldn't get water to drink.
Cheaper is wrong in emergency planning. it is not the primary consideration.
The single most important reason for our Federal government to advocate public cloud computing isnot about emergency resources or any such performance features.
It's about surveillance. In the cloud, they only need to deal with the provider, and have access to everything - warrants not necessary. My corporate server is behind a firewall that offers at least minimal resistance. My home server is even more difficult, not because it's any more well secured, but because the government can't so easily coerce the vendor to grant them a back door. No, my home server uses no Microsof or Cisco products at all.
We are not far from having the fight over real privacy and government intrusion. And this Administration, despite its initial promises to be transparent, open, and ethical, has continued the progress of other Administrations into our private information, in all forms.
This is more serious than most of us think. Corporations marshalling our data can lead us into choices we would not otherwise make, deny us opportunities we would otherwise have, and cost us more than we should otherwise have to pay. Government is trying to assert itself into our lives in extrordinary ways, and will use this data to deal with us to our detriment. Healthcare will become a more constrained resource with a single-government-payer system, and the more data they have on us, the better they can make decisions to manage that resource. And that will NOT improve our health. It will only reduce costs.
Where I come from, reducing the cost of something is easily achieved by reducing the quantity or quality of it.
Denying the government private data it shoudl not have is a two-edged sword. First, deny them the need - keep them out of your life as much as possible and practical. Second, challenge their collection of the data at every turn.
The public cloud is very attractive to those who want to see everything. It makes it easier. The debate about emergency services and whether they should be provisioned as dedicated resources is another issue entirely.
Mitt doesn't use a tablet. He has people for that.
Several translations don't even try to be literal. Sort of like reading the Iliad in English, but way more choices.
And you think this is YOUR planet? Hehe. That's funny.
Nothing would happen, unlike your tablet that erases itself when you turn it upside down.
Common misunderstanding. That was opensourced a couple thousand years ago.
You can hit the refresh button all you want, but the code doesn't change just cause you want to reboot.
So my old field service job was evil, since it took me into the countryside, where there was no mass transit.
I do get it.
Feedback. Punish them yourself. Though often eBay doesn't permit that, I know.
Make it like old NASCAR, then? Essentially waiting for a sprinter to collapse and die fo a massive infarct a foot from the finish line?
Sounds like progress to me. Not. Not everyone goes to NASCAR races to see someone turn right in traffic. Ignornin the three road courses naturally.
So you'd be against a frist psot competition?
That's a rather narrow way of looking at it...
Again, Amazon should punish sellers that don't honor their pricing. Simple concept. Ask eBay.
With any luck, evolution kicks in and such sellers die off. The stronger/smarter survive. We pay what we should expect to.
My morning commute is usually 30 minutes. The afternoon commute at least 45 minutes, same route in reverse. All I Want© is to have a speed-limit ride. I don't need to get there faster, I just want predictability. In the morning, we are largely all into predictability. In the afternoon, we are joined by idiots that must have speed over predictability, so bad things happen and cause delays. Oh, and increased volume which magnifies the problems. Evolution isn't solving this either, since the idiots' cars are saving their lives. Will Amazon save idiot sellers? Or will they punish them for idiocy?
True - one fix for sellers is to limit the number of items in any one campaign. Then iterate and improve.
The stock market problem is that HFT will gladly risk 100MM shares for the arbitrage, and if somehow the market evaporates, someone is holding the bag. Which brings us to this problem - despite the regulators' responsibility to, um, regulate, they are nearly always behind the curve. And the REAL problem - our legislature doesn't dare let the brokerages pay for their mistakes, since that would impact their investments also.
Throw them all out. Everywhere.
That's almost funny.
If the seller finds that the price was driven below cost by the algorith, how much would you want to bet that they will simply declare the item 'out of stock', and refuse to sell to you?
Groupon has been through an analog of this repeatedly, where someone will offer services for a discount, and get flooded with redemptions such that they cannot afford to do several years' work for nearly nothing. All the examples I'm aware of resulted in the offerer negotiating with their customers and resolving the problem, but Groupon at one time was deaf to the complaints that they should have counseled the merchant better. Probably correct, but not very helpful.
I'm betting reversals will happen, and Amazon will be selective in their punishment of vendors. Net result, mistrust and reduced confidence.
Ethanol isn't really food.
Our best/most valuable/most knowlegable/most flexible team member is 78. He can figure most everything out, and you only have to tell him once. He's only been here 23 years, I hear.
6 years ago I took a gig installing some servers. Among them were some Itanium boxes, and the lead asked who had worked with Itanium before. After everyone else shook their heads, I said I'd have a look at them. Yes, they were UEFI BIOS, and it took me an hour to work out the process to set things and get them ready to boot. In went the server CDs, then the image CDs, then I spent a week getting the images working on the new hardware. We had been assured that the rack and stack was the hard part, and that the images were sound and good to go. Of course not, newer model hardware etc. made that impossible. In a week we, as a team, had new locally updated images loading away without errors, and the Itaniums were online and working on Day 5. No Google, no cheats, I just had to sit down and figure it out. I was 52 at the time, and the oldster on the team, and no one knew it. I pass for 15 years younger in person.
My job now, I'm most valuable not because of my experience, or persistence, or ability to figure stuff out, though all that is critical. What sets me apart is my ability to work with customers of any skill level or temperment, defuse bad situations, and recover from my own and others' gaffes. And I;m not really that good at it. Techies are notoriously bad at customer relations. But it's learnable, and you can Google it up and gain a great deal of good advice.
Be patient with your co-workers, share with them as much as they will tolerate, speak no ill of them, and be patient. You'll either run the place one day or be in a much better position.
There are only three questions to ask of a job candidate. "Can you?" "Will you?" "Will you fit in?" No one is more important than the other. Learn to fit in, because this is the thing you cannot go to school for. All else is taught or summoned up by many. Fitting in is the real struggle. It may not always save your job, but it will not lose you one.
Just don't lose the learn everything attitude. My wife doesn't quite get the concept that in IT your work changes every 3-4 years. She teaches music. Asking her to imagine having to learn new scales, instruments, and signatures every 3-4 years doesn't make any sense to her. She can't imagine it. I've been at this since MS-DOS 2.2. Things have changed.
In 2006 I lost my cards at the gym - don't go there any more either. Next morning, on the way to work I get a call from my bank - 'Are you in las Vegas by any chance?' No, I am not, but my cards are, and had just bought something at a gas station for a few bucks, triggering an alert. Yup, my card was at a casino trying to load up on chips for some fun. I was assured they would not be loading up on my dime. I got two other calls in rapid succession from other banks and such, same story.
If my card was snagged and used locally, they might get away with it for a bit, but go too far and at least one of my banks etc would be asking me where I was.
While gas stations have somewhat different fraud rules, they don't want fraud any more than you. It is inefficient, bad for business, and always costs them something.
Using similar methods for e-voting sounds appealing; dispute resolution, notificaiton of out of pattern activity, etc, but this could be solved by giving you a receipt for your vote, scanning it with your phone or inputting the key into the website, and protesting anything that looks wrong.
And after all this, the system could STILL be gamed by counting imaginary results despite all the confirmations. Only by tramping down to the polls a few days later and running your wrinkled, faded, written-on receipt could you participate in a recount of any meaning. Better than nothing, but OCR paper ballots can do this now.
E-voting is not interesting to me yet. It serves someone else's purposes, not mine.
I wopiudl be interested in the naive idea that users shouidl be able to turn secure boot on and off. So if it's off, no Windows but other OSes could boot. On, and Windows would boot, but other OSes may or may not.
Then, if I choose to NOT use Windows, I'm in a much simpler reality.
Of course, I'm certain this cannot work. Darn.
"I want to be able to switch distros without jumping through hoops (yes, there are hoops to jump through now; this move by Canonical does nothing to advance any solution to that problem)."
So you want what you what you not only do not have now, but somehow manage without.
So you want Grand Unification between distributions. Oh my. I doubt we could even get decent migration tools between the major distros, 'major' :)
defined as the ones you and I use.
"and I am moderating in this discussion"
Oh, so you're circumventing the system.
Another reason to crush ACs and cast them out. Posting as AC to be able to moderate your comments is pus. May you burn.
"Treat all commenters in this discussion with suspicion and derision."
Suspicion is the norm around here. Derision is the default action of many/most.
I can't hardly tell the difference between the misinformed, ignorant, or paid/unpaid shills. So I end up considering the content of comments. Radical and time consuming, but hey, what else do I have to do?
And the price of bread/underwear/soap/videogamesetcetcetc.
Swoosh.
Cox isn't much, but I don't actualll get a default account, except for email, and that is just email.
My account info is not necessary to use service, just to automate payment, and I have to set up everything, no defaults.
My real concern is how this ISP determined using defaults made any sense. Really?