Very close, except that IPV4 isn't automatically able to talk on an IPV6 network, where as your black and white set kept getting a picture, even if it was broadcast in color.
read it again. The server was bought, if it hasn't been plugged into the network, that is the intent, and the question asked was "will you allow port 8443 through the firewall for my server X that I set up for my department?". This says the server is on the network, behind a firewall, and is probably a HIPAA violation, if not a SOX violation.
This is where my post was coming from. When I, as an IT person, am legally on the hook for the server you plugged in to the network, I am doing my job if I deny your ability to do so. If this server has a security flaw that allows it to be hacked and even "potentially" exposes private data, I'm in big trouble, you're in big trouble, and we'll all be lucky if it's just our job, and other legal issues for liability don't come in to play.
He's head of a clinical department at a hospital. Even if he is a tenured professor, violating IT policies that are based on HIPAA or other regulatory requirements are enough to get him removed from a position of authority, if not fired out right. Tenure has never protected from being fired for Just Cause.
Even without being a firing offense, asking him to remove the server or face possible consequences and taking steps to isolate it from talking to the network would be well advised steps for the IT department.
Indeed. Be happy they haven't fired you for violating acceptable use and/or purchasing policies. Don't expect to take this server with you when you leave, either.
IT not supporting the application is one thing, YOU buying unknown, unsupportable hardware, plugging it into their network and then being arrogant enough to decide they shouldn't even have a log in? You seem to be running a bit short on common sense here.
Also, this is not a random user requesting access, it is your information technology people who A) should know what they are doing and B) are on the hook for what happens on the network security-wise.
Linuxconf was such crap. It *WAS* dumbing down Linux, making it far to easy for "admins" (and I do use the term loosely) to configure a system. In general it led to insecure systems, systems that were just plain badly configured and barely worked, or file corruption (especially if you ever hand edited a file after linuxconf was done and went in to edit some other thing with linuxconf).
Having been on the tech support end of people using linuxconf, I can't believe anyone would remember it fondly. I can see wanting a simple interface that can configure *everything*, but I don't prefer admins that have some clue what the options do.
It may be capable of powering on, but it is essentially useless without program data. I believe the older ones could record 30 mins at a time, rendering it the equivalent of a dumb vcr. Not what people paid for.
If your smartphone was no longer able to do anything except call 911, you'd consider it bricked as well.
For those who are modding the parent troll: He's not trolling, He's right (insulting aside).
The number one obstacle to IPV6 deployment is an inability to make sense of the addressing scheme. If it's hard to wrap your head around what should be a simple concept, it stops working. People can understand addresses that are blocks of numbers like IPV4. Expanding the numbers used above 255, or adding a 5th space would have made MORE sense from a humans point of view. It really is like it was designed by people who forget that DNS is not self-administering, and people have to deal with these things even if DNS has gone down.
This should probably have been replaced with "don't see what they are doing as wrong". They think it should be legal because they do not think it is wrong.
Meh. To be fair, Gamestop is not mentioned anywhere. Just a "trade group" which actually appears to be more of a "trade magazine" with people who work at unnamed retailers.
In fact, the only company with someone who is named is Gaikai, a "a cloud based gaming service intended to make video games more accessible to a wider audience" according to Wikipedia. Based on that description, they aren't even a brick and mortar and are more of a competitor, so I'm not suprised they have a problem, but for the most part this is a list of sources who don't even say the company they work for is planning a boycott, and are odd positions ("digital boss"? What does that even mean?).
In short: Bad reporting, bad sources, tempest in a teacup, if even that. Give me the names of retailers and people who will stand up and say "Yes, we are going to boycott steam-enabled games" and I might believe some of it.
Find another class at the same time that's teaching programming.. pair some of the art students with a programmer to come up with a design for a simple mini-game. Have the art students come up with what they are good at, namely the art assets, "story", and plan with the programmer on the rewards. Have them discuss the logic of the game with the programmer and have the programmer implement the game using what the artist can provide.
It should help the understand the interactions they will face in the real world better.
It all makes sense now, Scrabble stole all of it's ideas from Monopoly! That's why you build hotels on the triple word score tiles!
On a serious note, not being able to copyright "game concepts" or "rules" won't stop you from being sued. Scrabble has sued several "play alikes", and so have the owners of Tetris.
The quote I got with this article seemed fitting: "It might help if we ran the MBA's out of Washington." -- Admiral Grace Hopper
The problem is the people who have the know-how are hell on a congress-cirtter's re-election. After all "you voted to spend (on NASA|other project not viewed as worthwile) " never goes over well.
...Luckily Ian Anderson is still with us, else the speed of his rotating in his grave would throw the earth off axis and we'd all need "MicroLungs"
Re:Oh good! The trolls are out in full force!
on
iOS 4 Releases Today
·
· Score: 1
That's terribly unfair, sir!
Your unfounded accusations ruin a man's rep. The Joker is not and has never been a Fascist, and I believe you owe him an apology, sir!
They're preparing these kids for the Real World (tm). Hence the ban on "personal laptops" and the enforcement of a standard platform with whatever arbitrary crapware/spyware/etc the school system decided was needed!
This is your captain, YX7-281B. Filthy humans, you are instructed to wear your seatbelt at all times in case of sudden deceleration. Failure to comply with these directions will result in cabin depressurization and abrupt deplaning of the offender. If you look to your right, you will see the burning remains of your civilization. Ha. Ha. That's a little robot humor, folks.
I find it funny, but do agree. This does smack of being the wrong reaction.
On the other hand, regarding the speed cameras: Just like the red light cameras most jurisdictions classify it as a "civil" penalty with a much lower burden of proof than a criminal charge. Most times it doesn't even make a visual record of who was driving the car, and if you can't provide who "may have been" driving it, you're stuck with the ticket because they don't have to prove the registered owner of the car was the person driving it.
Additionally, most of the revenue for such systems go right back into the companies that make and usually run them (leading to a no law-enforcement involvement in checking the operation, etc) for the state/county/city. In North Carolina they got hung out to dry on this point because any criminal penalties have specific requirements that a certain percentage go to education. Someone successfully argued that speeding was a crime, not a civil action and therefore the money being paid to these companies needed to be redirected. Since they would now have to pay for the program out of local budgets, the programs quickly came to an end.
If they could set these things up in a way that identified the driver, had the same burden of proof as the police officer pulling someone over (ie, operation checked for accuracy,etc) I'd have less of an issue with the idea. As it is, these things are a rights-trampling nightmare.
Slashdot Mirror
Very close, except that IPV4 isn't automatically able to talk on an IPV6 network, where as your black and white set kept getting a picture, even if it was broadcast in color.
read it again. The server was bought, if it hasn't been plugged into the network, that is the intent, and the question asked was "will you allow port 8443 through the firewall for my server X that I set up for my department?". This says the server is on the network, behind a firewall, and is probably a HIPAA violation, if not a SOX violation.
This is where my post was coming from. When I, as an IT person, am legally on the hook for the server you plugged in to the network, I am doing my job if I deny your ability to do so. If this server has a security flaw that allows it to be hacked and even "potentially" exposes private data, I'm in big trouble, you're in big trouble, and we'll all be lucky if it's just our job, and other legal issues for liability don't come in to play.
And never deal with Sony^H^H^H^H Microsoft^H^H^H^H^H Apple^H^H^H^H^H a Dragon.
He's head of a clinical department at a hospital. Even if he is a tenured professor, violating IT policies that are based on HIPAA or other regulatory requirements are enough to get him removed from a position of authority, if not fired out right. Tenure has never protected from being fired for Just Cause.
Even without being a firing offense, asking him to remove the server or face possible consequences and taking steps to isolate it from talking to the network would be well advised steps for the IT department.
Indeed. Be happy they haven't fired you for violating acceptable use and/or purchasing policies. Don't expect to take this server with you when you leave, either.
IT not supporting the application is one thing, YOU buying unknown, unsupportable hardware, plugging it into their network and then being arrogant enough to decide they shouldn't even have a log in? You seem to be running a bit short on common sense here.
Also, this is not a random user requesting access, it is your information technology people who A) should know what they are doing and B) are on the hook for what happens on the network security-wise.
Linuxconf was such crap. It *WAS* dumbing down Linux, making it far to easy for "admins" (and I do use the term loosely) to configure a system. In general it led to insecure systems, systems that were just plain badly configured and barely worked, or file corruption (especially if you ever hand edited a file after linuxconf was done and went in to edit some other thing with linuxconf).
Having been on the tech support end of people using linuxconf, I can't believe anyone would remember it fondly. I can see wanting a simple interface that can configure *everything*, but I don't prefer admins that have some clue what the options do.
It may be capable of powering on, but it is essentially useless without program data. I believe the older ones could record 30 mins at a time, rendering it the equivalent of a dumb vcr. Not what people paid for.
If your smartphone was no longer able to do anything except call 911, you'd consider it bricked as well.
For those who are modding the parent troll: He's not trolling, He's right (insulting aside).
The number one obstacle to IPV6 deployment is an inability to make sense of the addressing scheme. If it's hard to wrap your head around what should be a simple concept, it stops working.
People can understand addresses that are blocks of numbers like IPV4. Expanding the numbers used above 255, or adding a 5th space would have made MORE sense from a humans point of view. It really is like it was designed by people who forget that DNS is not self-administering, and people have to deal with these things even if DNS has gone down.
This should probably have been replaced with "don't see what they are doing as wrong". They think it should be legal because they do not think it is wrong.
Meh. To be fair, Gamestop is not mentioned anywhere. Just a "trade group" which actually appears to be more of a "trade magazine" with people who work at unnamed retailers.
In fact, the only company with someone who is named is Gaikai, a "a cloud based gaming service intended to make video games more accessible to a wider audience" according to Wikipedia. Based on that description, they aren't even a brick and mortar and are more of a competitor, so I'm not suprised they have a problem, but for the most part this is a list of sources who don't even say the company they work for is planning a boycott, and are odd positions ("digital boss"? What does that even mean?).
In short: Bad reporting, bad sources, tempest in a teacup, if even that. Give me the names of retailers and people who will stand up and say "Yes, we are going to boycott steam-enabled games" and I might believe some of it.
It's morse! It says "Tintmee", there you go, it's just instructions for the artist to shade (tint) that area!
Why not pursue the mircochip company for fraud? They obviously sold him a set of services they did not have the ability to legally provide..
Find another class at the same time that's teaching programming.. pair some of the art students with a programmer to come up with a design for a simple mini-game. Have the art students come up with what they are good at, namely the art assets, "story", and plan with the programmer on the rewards. Have them discuss the logic of the game with the programmer and have the programmer implement the game using what the artist can provide.
It should help the understand the interactions they will face in the real world better.
It all makes sense now, Scrabble stole all of it's ideas from Monopoly! That's why you build hotels on the triple word score tiles!
On a serious note, not being able to copyright "game concepts" or "rules" won't stop you from being sued. Scrabble has sued several "play alikes", and so have the owners of Tetris.
Freedom is the right of all sentient beings
--Optimus Prime
The quote I got with this article seemed fitting: "It might help if we ran the MBA's out of Washington." -- Admiral Grace Hopper
The problem is the people who have the know-how are hell on a congress-cirtter's re-election. After all "you voted to spend (on NASA|other project not viewed as worthwile) " never goes over well.
...Luckily Ian Anderson is still with us, else the speed of his rotating in his grave would throw the earth off axis and we'd all need "MicroLungs"
That's terribly unfair, sir!
Your unfounded accusations ruin a man's rep. The Joker is not and has never been a Fascist, and I believe you owe him an apology, sir!
When has that stopped anyone from running for office?
That entirely depends on the job.
I personally find that schools in the US really need overhaul. They aren't very good at edumacatin'
They're preparing these kids for the Real World (tm). Hence the ban on "personal laptops" and the enforcement of a standard platform with whatever arbitrary crapware/spyware/etc the school system decided was needed!
This is your captain, YX7-281B. Filthy humans, you are instructed to wear your seatbelt at all times in case of sudden deceleration. Failure to comply with these directions will result in cabin depressurization and abrupt deplaning of the offender. If you look to your right, you will see the burning remains of your civilization. Ha. Ha. That's a little robot humor, folks.
He wnats the info because he's an alien trying to catch a ride home. I mean seriously, just look at the picture.. He's totally a grey in disguise!
More seriously, why not work out a deal where he won't be stuffed in supermax?
I find it funny, but do agree. This does smack of being the wrong reaction.
On the other hand, regarding the speed cameras: Just like the red light cameras most jurisdictions classify it as a "civil" penalty with a much lower burden of proof than a criminal charge. Most times it doesn't even make a visual record of who was driving the car, and if you can't provide who "may have been" driving it, you're stuck with the ticket because they don't have to prove the registered owner of the car was the person driving it.
Additionally, most of the revenue for such systems go right back into the companies that make and usually run them (leading to a no law-enforcement involvement in checking the operation, etc) for the state/county/city. In North Carolina they got hung out to dry on this point because any criminal penalties have specific requirements that a certain percentage go to education. Someone successfully argued that speeding was a crime, not a civil action and therefore the money being paid to these companies needed to be redirected. Since they would now have to pay for the program out of local budgets, the programs quickly came to an end.
If they could set these things up in a way that identified the driver, had the same burden of proof as the police officer pulling someone over (ie, operation checked for accuracy,etc) I'd have less of an issue with the idea. As it is, these things are a rights-trampling nightmare.