Like others said, get a cheapo box throw two ethernet cards in it, load Linux, and use it as a router. I have this setup myself, along with 4 Windows machines behind it.
Believe me, I sleep better at night, knowing that I have Linux between the Internet and my Windows boxes. There are a number of good firewall/proxy/router tools for Linux. You can then use the traffic shaping software, and more importantly, you don't have to worry about the constant security weaknesses found in Windows that make your machine an easy target for hackers.
First of all, IANAL but, I am almost positive that you must try to enforce patent infringement as soon as you realize the infringement has taken place. If you fail to protect your patent, knowing that infringement has occurred, you lose your rights to the patent.
What are they going to say, "Well gee Your Honor, we didn't figure out JPEGs were infringing on our patent until 2002." Yeah, right. I don't think so.
And so, this is the second time they've needed remote medical help because the doctor there wasn't capable of handling the job themselves. Seems to me that this will necessarily lead to the creation of the EMH (Emergency Medical Hologram). These South Pole people really need to talk to the Star Trek people and get to work.
Just to correct on minor misstatement on my part. The genetic defect in question does not necessarily cause anxiety disorders, it simply makes one prone to them. Usually external events trigger them. Afterwards they sort of feed on themselves. I can point you to a great deal of literature on the subject if you'd like to refrain from making ignorant comments about it in the future.
Here are some places where you can begin to educate yourself.
No, I got it from my doctor, which was backed up by a number of studies. Most people who suffer from anxiety disorders (something like 95%) have a genetic defect that leads to a defecency in several neurotransmitters. Paxil, Prozac, Zoloft, and other members of the SSRI (Selective Seratonin Reuptake Inhibitors) deal with one of those neurotransmitters (Seratonin, as the name would imply). Some of the newer ones, like Effexor deal with two.
I've done quite a bit of research about anxiety disorders, having suffered from them for years. I would be 10 to 1 odds that I know a shitload more about it than you.
Funny, I was just telling a story to my mother the other day about the chemistry set my father bought me when I was 12. Yeah, the glass bending was fun. Of course, after you bent the glass, it was so damn hot, I decided to cool it off in some water. That's when I learned that hot glass being cooled quickly EXPLODES! No, I wasn't blinded, but had I been, can you imagine the lawsuit?
But hey, when you don't RTFM, sometimes you just have to learn the hard way!
I suffer from a chemical imbalance that causes an anxiety disorder. Because of this, I can't really tolerate coffee. I drink tea, about 3 cups a day, which is about the equivalent of one cup of coffee. I'm screwed. I can handle the coffee just fine with valium, so I guess I just need to get my doctor to give me enough valium to support drinking 3 cups of coffee a day:-)
Most of the files transmitted through p2p can just as easily be sent through the mail on a disk. Why not ban mail?
I have to agree with the original author. Most people use P2P software for illegitimate, or more precisely, illegal activity. The other methods, HTTP, FTP, e-mail, are different. They are not use PRIMARILY for illegal activity.
If you deny that P2P software is being used primarily for illegal activities, then you're kidding yourself.
Hey, I'd be pissed if my provider cut off my p2p access, but I'm not going to be disillusioned about why.
Computers are more complex machines than cars by far
I find this a little hard to swallow. One: Most new cars have computers in them, therefore, at a minimum, they are at least as complex as computers. Two: Most mechanics have trouble with modern cars unless they have the diagnostic programs available only to dealers, which diagnoses the problem via the onboard computer.
Therefore, I'd argue that cars these days are MORE complex than cars.
This pretty much invalidates your arguments, but I'll go on. You don't need to know a thing about a car's engine to buy and drive a car. They're "ready to go" when you get them. If you can figure out how to fill up the gas tank (or plug in the computer to maintain the analogy), you should be good to go.
That's where Linux fails. The average user can plug it in, but what you have to know to run Linux is too much for the average user.
My most recent install is a Red Hat 7.2. Is that too ancient to use as a comparison? After all, Red Hat is the most widespread distribution and the most reputable to the average user (by average user, I mean people who aren't developers or nerds).
I was able to get through the installation okay, but going beyond that was a pain in the ass. While I admit KDE has come far (I find it much easier to use than Gnome), it still has a long way to go. I could list about a thousand things wrong with either. Almost all of those things are related to bad user interface design.
I admire all the people who spend time to develop these products, but they are not spending enough time on user interface design or they're not spending their time studying it. It's one of the most important aspects of programming, in my book. If users don't LIKE to use your software, they won't use it. Frankly, there's very little software for Linux that I LIKE to use.
I use Linux for certain uses (firewalls, mail servers, web servers), because I trust it, not because it's easier to use.
My only argument is that making it easy to use is the main bridge to cross. You do that, and the users will come.
I've been saying this all along. There's nothing wrong with Linux, per se. It's the user interface and the complexity for the user in setting it up and configuring it.
As a developer, I develop where the money is, which right now is Windows. Were it Linux, believe me, I'd be happier.
I might disagree with what the top 10 problems are (a lack of freecell wouldn't be very high on my list), but simply an ease of configuration and basic apps (as he mentioned, browser, e-mail, and so forth). By basic apps, I mean apps that are as simple to configure as their Windows counterparts.
What happens the first time you run Outlook Express? It asks you for the bare minimum of information to receive and send you e-mail. No more than that. Look how simple IE is to run and configure.
I'll grant that the problem with IE now is that people are building web sites that are IE specific. I'd link the article, but I'm too lazy, but it was just in the past few days, so go look yourself.
This problem is simple to fix. Emulate MS. Copy what their browser can do, and you're now compatible. Is that giving in to them? Not so much as it's taking away their advantage.
Same with everything else. Where MS does well, (either by UI or by dominance), emulate and improve.
I use Linux, but I use it for a single thing that I know it's good at: It's my firewall. And frankly, being a very compentent programmer and having almost two decades of experience with the internet, I find IPTABLES to be a bitch to configure. It's more complex than it needs to be. Just like most Linux software.
Here's the general aim at our company with our software: Make it simple enough for the average idiot, but make it configurable that the advanced user can do what they want. If Linux developers would do the same, Linux would benefit a great deal.
Re:to the historian, the ordinary is invaluable.
on
Digital Dark Ages?
·
· Score: 2
If it's important enough to you, then you should make a backup. Otherwise, I'd assume that you don't consider it particularly valuable.
Take a sheet of metal, thick enough to withstand an impact from most pieces it will run into. On either side of the metal sheet, attach a few layers of mattresses or something similar. The metal would shoot through the mattress, hit the metal plate, lose most of its energy, and the pieces would generally get caught in the ricochet (if not the initial entry).
Send a bunch of these up and send them to the predicted "hot spots." Over a period of a few years, they could absorb quite a bit of material. Being low-tech, they're cheap to make. Costly to get into orbit because of the weight, but seems like it could be affordable enough.
Actually, I was thinking more along the lines of the space elevator concept, where getting the stuff into orbit is both cheap and safe.
If it's worth saving, it'll probably be saved
on
Digital Dark Ages?
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
Think about it. 98% of what's out on the web is crap. The stuff that's really valuable get's copied, in general. People do mirrors, or download pages. I doubt much of real value will be lost in the long run. I mean, geez, I'm going to be really bummed when my porn collection goes bad, but I downloaded it from others, so it's still out there somewhere.
do whe know the effects of increasing the amount of haevier elements (anything above iron (Fe) in the periodic table)? Astronomers think that that's why stars die or even *explode*..
Really? Please, tell me where I can look this up because I've rarely heard such a ridiculous claim. Having studied quite a bit about astronomy, I've never read about this fact.
What I have read is that the sun has a mass of over 300,000 Earths. It's basically a nuclear fusion reactor going full steam all the time. Tossing a few thousand tons of radioactive material at it would be a drop in the bucket.
Stars are created from the same material as planets, actually, so there's a small amount of uranium and plutonium already in the sun. After all, the Earth is created from the remains of dead stars, and if it has uranium and plutonium, then those stars that created it must have had them.
To be sure, we've made them more radiocative than they are naturally, but there's a hell of a lot more radiation in the sun.
As for your other point about "missing", again, I point you to the size of the sun. Yeah, we've missed Mars a couple of times because of miscalculations, but it's damn hard to miss the sun when you're aiming dead onto it. Not to mention, by the time it's affordable, the technology will be a hell of a lot better. And FINALLY, the chances of it coming back and hitting Earth, were we to "miss", are a few hundred trillion to one, at least.
First of all, yes, it's nuclear waste, it's dangerous stuff. But, we know a lot more about it than the old days. Keeping the waste at regularly, and calculated, separated intervals there is no real danger. The danger lies in leaving it too close so that individual containers can charge each other up and potentially cause an explosion. That won't be happening in Nevada.
The reality is, we have to put the waste somewhere, and under the desert floor is as good as any (and better than most). Except for the waste, fission is an incredibly safe form of power. Properly disposed of, the waste can be pretty benign. Yucca mountain is a good place for the waste, and were I to live near there, personally, I wouldn't worry about it. But that's me, knowing what I know.
Once we can safely and cheaply launch it into space, we can simply fire it off at the sun where it will do nothing. Until that day, we need a place here to store it.
I lived in Mexico for 2 years. I was in better shape than any time in my life. The only exercise I got, was walking a mile or two a day. Part of the lifestyle in the beach/resort town I lived in, was simply to drink beer and hang out all day. The big difference was that I had no stress. I ate some good food, but I also ate a lot of food that's not too good for you. Hot dogs (3 or 4 at a time), fried chicken or beef sandwiches.
At 5' 10", I weighed about 155. I returned to the states and very quickly put on 35-40 pounds. I had a high stress job that really caused problems, beyond just my weight. I'm now down to about 175 and slowly losing weight. How? I reduced the stress in my life. Yes, I'm eating a little better too, and exercising a bit, but not much.
At one point, when I was at my peak weight (and stress), I worked out hard, EVERY day, for about 2 months. I didn't lose a singe pound.
Maybe a stress-free life lends itself to a healthier lifestyle, but that's where I'd start. I'll be back to 155 in the next 2 months, if I can manage to keep the stress level low.
This is the question anyone will ask. Nobody cares about the world their kids will grow up in (okay, I'm not speaking for all the responsible parents on Slashdot), but really, people don't care. Their kids will, sure as shit. My kids will care. Their world will be going to shit and I and my generation will be largely responsible.
Show me how to get others of my generation to take responsibility and fix this mess. Otherwise, you're wasting my time with and OLD issue.
My interest is actually in advanced physics, but that requires a pretty serious math background. I went to a local university bookstore and bought up some textbooks on calculus. I also bought books at my local bookstore on calculus, and topology.
I study on my own. I use the internet as a resource, as there are quite a few sites that have tutorials on math.
I tend to learn best on my own, if I have a source of asking questions. Again, the internet comes in handy there. Google Groups sci.math is also a good source for asking questions.
If I feel I have what it takes, my goal is to go back and get a graduate degree in Physics, but it's hard to do when you have a full-time job and other responsibilities. I'll get as far as I can on my own first, though.
I will claim quite a bit of ignorance on this issue. I have just recently set up my own 802.11b system at home. Because it's inside my firewall (a Linux box that acts as router/web cache/firewall), I didn't want it to be open to the world (and I hope it isn't). The rest of my machines are Windows (it's my job, sorry), and they're all pretty exposed, hence the Linux box in the middle. I got a Linksys AP and card.
I had a lot of problems getting WEP to work properly (though I think I could get it working now), so I simply did a MAC address restriction on the AP and, if I understand it properly, nobody should be able to use my AP but a machine with my laptop's MAC address (which is supposedly unique). That doesn't mean the traffic can't be monitored. For this, I don't know, but I'm not real concerned about that.
Wouldn't a combination of WEP and MAC address restrictions be enough for most places, though?
at least not from scratch. You'll find you'll probably save yourself a lot of frustration by buying a barebones system (case, power supply, motherboard, and CPU), and going from there. I did a build it from scratch earlier this year and it was a nightmare. The place where the heatsink clips onto the CPU socket broke off, and I had to get a replacement motherboard. On top of which, the pieces came at different times, and in the end, I didn't really save any money.
On the other hand, for $200 or so, I bought and Athlon 1700 on e-bay, with motherboard, case, power supply, CPU w/fan, etc). I then bought a hard drive and memory, and used an existing DVD drive (who needs a floppy these days?). It was a fourth computer that plugged into a KVM switch, so that was pretty much all I needed.
For a total of about $400, I had an Athlon 1700 that works quite well. I consider that a good bargain, and on the day the machine arrived, in less than an hour, I had it up and running. Painless.
Sounds to me, from your description, that your company has a bad attitude towards software development. If they're not willing to listen to the developers (and again, from your description, it sounds like this goes above just the project managers), then it's going to be really tough to change the tide.
I've worked in places where non-technical people were the project managers, and invariably, they were bad project managers. I'm not saying there aren't good ones out there that aren't technical. I just haven't met any of them.
Not all developers make good project managers, by the same token. I found I wasn't particularly good at it. I'm just not organized enough, and personally, I prefer the development aspect. The one advantage I did have though, was that I listened to the developers, and I understood the issues. I knew what was possible and what wasn't. I knew when developers were being realistic and when they were unrealistic, same for management. Fortunately, I was able to bridge the gap between upper management and the developers pretty well, and I was able to manage the expectations of upper management.
If your current company is unwilling to bridge that gap, then your situation is probably hopeless, and you may be better served at a company that knows how to develop software properly.
Slashdot Mirror
Like others said, get a cheapo box throw two ethernet cards in it, load Linux, and use it as a router. I have this setup myself, along with 4 Windows machines behind it.
Believe me, I sleep better at night, knowing that I have Linux between the Internet and my Windows boxes. There are a number of good firewall/proxy/router tools for Linux. You can then use the traffic shaping software, and more importantly, you don't have to worry about the constant security weaknesses found in Windows that make your machine an easy target for hackers.
First of all, IANAL but, I am almost positive that you must try to enforce patent infringement as soon as you realize the infringement has taken place. If you fail to protect your patent, knowing that infringement has occurred, you lose your rights to the patent.
What are they going to say, "Well gee Your Honor, we didn't figure out JPEGs were infringing on our patent until 2002." Yeah, right. I don't think so.
But like I said, IANAL, so maybe I'm wrong.
And so, this is the second time they've needed remote medical help because the doctor there wasn't capable of handling the job themselves. Seems to me that this will necessarily lead to the creation of the EMH (Emergency Medical Hologram). These South Pole people really need to talk to the Star Trek people and get to work.
At 12 years old, I wasn't exactly well versed in "laboratory safety." Hey, my parents gave me a new toy. That's all it was to me.
Just to correct on minor misstatement on my part. The genetic defect in question does not necessarily cause anxiety disorders, it simply makes one prone to them. Usually external events trigger them. Afterwards they sort of feed on themselves. I can point you to a great deal of literature on the subject if you'd like to refrain from making ignorant comments about it in the future.
Here are some places where you can begin to educate yourself.
What, did you get that line out of a Paxil ad?
No, I got it from my doctor, which was backed up by a number of studies. Most people who suffer from anxiety disorders (something like 95%) have a genetic defect that leads to a defecency in several neurotransmitters. Paxil, Prozac, Zoloft, and other members of the SSRI (Selective Seratonin Reuptake Inhibitors) deal with one of those neurotransmitters (Seratonin, as the name would imply). Some of the newer ones, like Effexor deal with two.
I've done quite a bit of research about anxiety disorders, having suffered from them for years. I would be 10 to 1 odds that I know a shitload more about it than you.
Funny, I was just telling a story to my mother the other day about the chemistry set my father bought me when I was 12. Yeah, the glass bending was fun. Of course, after you bent the glass, it was so damn hot, I decided to cool it off in some water. That's when I learned that hot glass being cooled quickly EXPLODES! No, I wasn't blinded, but had I been, can you imagine the lawsuit?
But hey, when you don't RTFM, sometimes you just have to learn the hard way!
I suffer from a chemical imbalance that causes an anxiety disorder. Because of this, I can't really tolerate coffee. I drink tea, about 3 cups a day, which is about the equivalent of one cup of coffee. I'm screwed. I can handle the coffee just fine with valium, so I guess I just need to get my doctor to give me enough valium to support drinking 3 cups of coffee a day :-)
Most of the files transmitted through p2p can just as easily be sent through the mail on a disk. Why not ban mail?
I have to agree with the original author. Most people use P2P software for illegitimate, or more precisely, illegal activity. The other methods, HTTP, FTP, e-mail, are different. They are not use PRIMARILY for illegal activity.
If you deny that P2P software is being used primarily for illegal activities, then you're kidding yourself.
Hey, I'd be pissed if my provider cut off my p2p access, but I'm not going to be disillusioned about why.
Computers are more complex machines than cars by far
I find this a little hard to swallow. One: Most new cars have computers in them, therefore, at a minimum, they are at least as complex as computers. Two: Most mechanics have trouble with modern cars unless they have the diagnostic programs available only to dealers, which diagnoses the problem via the onboard computer.
Therefore, I'd argue that cars these days are MORE complex than cars.
This pretty much invalidates your arguments, but I'll go on. You don't need to know a thing about a car's engine to buy and drive a car. They're "ready to go" when you get them. If you can figure out how to fill up the gas tank (or plug in the computer to maintain the analogy), you should be good to go.
That's where Linux fails. The average user can plug it in, but what you have to know to run Linux is too much for the average user.
My most recent install is a Red Hat 7.2. Is that too ancient to use as a comparison? After all, Red Hat is the most widespread distribution and the most reputable to the average user (by average user, I mean people who aren't developers or nerds).
I was able to get through the installation okay, but going beyond that was a pain in the ass. While I admit KDE has come far (I find it much easier to use than Gnome), it still has a long way to go. I could list about a thousand things wrong with either. Almost all of those things are related to bad user interface design.
I admire all the people who spend time to develop these products, but they are not spending enough time on user interface design or they're not spending their time studying it. It's one of the most important aspects of programming, in my book. If users don't LIKE to use your software, they won't use it. Frankly, there's very little software for Linux that I LIKE to use.
I use Linux for certain uses (firewalls, mail servers, web servers), because I trust it, not because it's easier to use.
My only argument is that making it easy to use is the main bridge to cross. You do that, and the users will come.
I've been saying this all along. There's nothing wrong with Linux, per se. It's the user interface and the complexity for the user in setting it up and configuring it.
As a developer, I develop where the money is, which right now is Windows. Were it Linux, believe me, I'd be happier.
I might disagree with what the top 10 problems are (a lack of freecell wouldn't be very high on my list), but simply an ease of configuration and basic apps (as he mentioned, browser, e-mail, and so forth). By basic apps, I mean apps that are as simple to configure as their Windows counterparts.
What happens the first time you run Outlook Express? It asks you for the bare minimum of information to receive and send you e-mail. No more than that. Look how simple IE is to run and configure.
I'll grant that the problem with IE now is that people are building web sites that are IE specific. I'd link the article, but I'm too lazy, but it was just in the past few days, so go look yourself.
This problem is simple to fix. Emulate MS. Copy what their browser can do, and you're now compatible. Is that giving in to them? Not so much as it's taking away their advantage.
Same with everything else. Where MS does well, (either by UI or by dominance), emulate and improve.
I use Linux, but I use it for a single thing that I know it's good at: It's my firewall. And frankly, being a very compentent programmer and having almost two decades of experience with the internet, I find IPTABLES to be a bitch to configure. It's more complex than it needs to be. Just like most Linux software.
Here's the general aim at our company with our software: Make it simple enough for the average idiot, but make it configurable that the advanced user can do what they want. If Linux developers would do the same, Linux would benefit a great deal.
If it's important enough to you, then you should make a backup. Otherwise, I'd assume that you don't consider it particularly valuable.
Take a sheet of metal, thick enough to withstand an impact from most pieces it will run into. On either side of the metal sheet, attach a few layers of mattresses or something similar. The metal would shoot through the mattress, hit the metal plate, lose most of its energy, and the pieces would generally get caught in the ricochet (if not the initial entry).
Send a bunch of these up and send them to the predicted "hot spots." Over a period of a few years, they could absorb quite a bit of material. Being low-tech, they're cheap to make. Costly to get into orbit because of the weight, but seems like it could be affordable enough.
Actually, I was thinking more along the lines of the space elevator concept, where getting the stuff into orbit is both cheap and safe.
Think about it. 98% of what's out on the web is crap. The stuff that's really valuable get's copied, in general. People do mirrors, or download pages. I doubt much of real value will be lost in the long run. I mean, geez, I'm going to be really bummed when my porn collection goes bad, but I downloaded it from others, so it's still out there somewhere.
do whe know the effects of increasing the amount of haevier elements (anything above iron (Fe) in the periodic table)? Astronomers think that that's why stars die or even *explode* ..
Really? Please, tell me where I can look this up because I've rarely heard such a ridiculous claim. Having studied quite a bit about astronomy, I've never read about this fact.
What I have read is that the sun has a mass of over 300,000 Earths. It's basically a nuclear fusion reactor going full steam all the time. Tossing a few thousand tons of radioactive material at it would be a drop in the bucket.
Stars are created from the same material as planets, actually, so there's a small amount of uranium and plutonium already in the sun. After all, the Earth is created from the remains of dead stars, and if it has uranium and plutonium, then those stars that created it must have had them.
To be sure, we've made them more radiocative than they are naturally, but there's a hell of a lot more radiation in the sun.
As for your other point about "missing", again, I point you to the size of the sun. Yeah, we've missed Mars a couple of times because of miscalculations, but it's damn hard to miss the sun when you're aiming dead onto it. Not to mention, by the time it's affordable, the technology will be a hell of a lot better. And FINALLY, the chances of it coming back and hitting Earth, were we to "miss", are a few hundred trillion to one, at least.
First of all, yes, it's nuclear waste, it's dangerous stuff. But, we know a lot more about it than the old days. Keeping the waste at regularly, and calculated, separated intervals there is no real danger. The danger lies in leaving it too close so that individual containers can charge each other up and potentially cause an explosion. That won't be happening in Nevada.
The reality is, we have to put the waste somewhere, and under the desert floor is as good as any (and better than most). Except for the waste, fission is an incredibly safe form of power. Properly disposed of, the waste can be pretty benign. Yucca mountain is a good place for the waste, and were I to live near there, personally, I wouldn't worry about it. But that's me, knowing what I know.
Once we can safely and cheaply launch it into space, we can simply fire it off at the sun where it will do nothing. Until that day, we need a place here to store it.
I lived in Mexico for 2 years. I was in better shape than any time in my life. The only exercise I got, was walking a mile or two a day. Part of the lifestyle in the beach/resort town I lived in, was simply to drink beer and hang out all day. The big difference was that I had no stress. I ate some good food, but I also ate a lot of food that's not too good for you. Hot dogs (3 or 4 at a time), fried chicken or beef sandwiches.
At 5' 10", I weighed about 155. I returned to the states and very quickly put on 35-40 pounds. I had a high stress job that really caused problems, beyond just my weight. I'm now down to about 175 and slowly losing weight. How? I reduced the stress in my life. Yes, I'm eating a little better too, and exercising a bit, but not much.
At one point, when I was at my peak weight (and stress), I worked out hard, EVERY day, for about 2 months. I didn't lose a singe pound.
Maybe a stress-free life lends itself to a healthier lifestyle, but that's where I'd start. I'll be back to 155 in the next 2 months, if I can manage to keep the stress level low.
This is the question anyone will ask. Nobody cares about the world their kids will grow up in (okay, I'm not speaking for all the responsible parents on Slashdot), but really, people don't care. Their kids will, sure as shit. My kids will care. Their world will be going to shit and I and my generation will be largely responsible.
Show me how to get others of my generation to take responsibility and fix this mess. Otherwise, you're wasting my time with and OLD issue.
My interest is actually in advanced physics, but that requires a pretty serious math background. I went to a local university bookstore and bought up some textbooks on calculus. I also bought books at my local bookstore on calculus, and topology.
I study on my own. I use the internet as a resource, as there are quite a few sites that have tutorials on math.
I tend to learn best on my own, if I have a source of asking questions. Again, the internet comes in handy there. Google Groups sci.math is also a good source for asking questions.
If I feel I have what it takes, my goal is to go back and get a graduate degree in Physics, but it's hard to do when you have a full-time job and other responsibilities. I'll get as far as I can on my own first, though.
Request additions:
www.cnn.com
www.nytimes.com
www.washingtonpost.com
www.wsj.com
www.google.com
www.yahoo.com
www.datek.com
www.travelocity.com
www.orbitz.com
www.microsoft.com
That should just about put an end to them.
I will claim quite a bit of ignorance on this issue. I have just recently set up my own 802.11b system at home. Because it's inside my firewall (a Linux box that acts as router/web cache/firewall), I didn't want it to be open to the world (and I hope it isn't). The rest of my machines are Windows (it's my job, sorry), and they're all pretty exposed, hence the Linux box in the middle. I got a Linksys AP and card.
I had a lot of problems getting WEP to work properly (though I think I could get it working now), so I simply did a MAC address restriction on the AP and, if I understand it properly, nobody should be able to use my AP but a machine with my laptop's MAC address (which is supposedly unique). That doesn't mean the traffic can't be monitored. For this, I don't know, but I'm not real concerned about that.
Wouldn't a combination of WEP and MAC address restrictions be enough for most places, though?
at least not from scratch. You'll find you'll probably save yourself a lot of frustration by buying a barebones system (case, power supply, motherboard, and CPU), and going from there. I did a build it from scratch earlier this year and it was a nightmare. The place where the heatsink clips onto the CPU socket broke off, and I had to get a replacement motherboard. On top of which, the pieces came at different times, and in the end, I didn't really save any money.
On the other hand, for $200 or so, I bought and Athlon 1700 on e-bay, with motherboard, case, power supply, CPU w/fan, etc). I then bought a hard drive and memory, and used an existing DVD drive (who needs a floppy these days?). It was a fourth computer that plugged into a KVM switch, so that was pretty much all I needed.
For a total of about $400, I had an Athlon 1700 that works quite well. I consider that a good bargain, and on the day the machine arrived, in less than an hour, I had it up and running. Painless.
Just my personal experience.
Sounds to me, from your description, that your company has a bad attitude towards software development. If they're not willing to listen to the developers (and again, from your description, it sounds like this goes above just the project managers), then it's going to be really tough to change the tide.
I've worked in places where non-technical people were the project managers, and invariably, they were bad project managers. I'm not saying there aren't good ones out there that aren't technical. I just haven't met any of them.
Not all developers make good project managers, by the same token. I found I wasn't particularly good at it. I'm just not organized enough, and personally, I prefer the development aspect. The one advantage I did have though, was that I listened to the developers, and I understood the issues. I knew what was possible and what wasn't. I knew when developers were being realistic and when they were unrealistic, same for management. Fortunately, I was able to bridge the gap between upper management and the developers pretty well, and I was able to manage the expectations of upper management.
If your current company is unwilling to bridge that gap, then your situation is probably hopeless, and you may be better served at a company that knows how to develop software properly.
Check out this to get most of your answers. Shouldn't we be asking him stuff that isn't sitting on their website?